From dontask2much at yahoo.com Wed Dec 1 00:12:39 2004 From: dontask2much at yahoo.com (charme) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 19:12:39 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Another Flint? (Was: When?) References: <20041130220014.93903.qmail@web53103.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <001501c4d73a$78756110$6701a8c0@MITRE.ORG> No: HPFGUIDX 118916 From: "Juli" >> kjirstem: >> >> I've wondered if the Creeveys were part house-elf >> since they are >> always described as being very small. > > Juli: Half-elves? is that even possible? They are > small but I was thinking 4 feet tall or 1.20 meters, > that's short for a 14 year old, but not a midget, I > always believed they were 100% muggle, and they just > come from a short family. Would a half-elf be allowed > to enter Hogwarts? > charme: I think kjirstem's point is what JKR wants us to suspect, otherwise why mention stature so much? And to Juli's question, a half giant and a werewolf were admitted, why wouldn't a half elf be admitted too? charme From aletamay01 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 1 00:25:38 2004 From: aletamay01 at yahoo.com (hogsheadbarmaid) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 00:25:38 -0000 Subject: Hogwarts letters Re: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118917 Del replies : "I don't see it exactly like that. From the way it looks, Muggleborns just trade one world for another. They leave the Muggle World to go and live in the WW. And considering that the WW is a secret world, I wouldn't say that going to Hogwarts opens the world to them, quite the opposite. It's like moving from the States to some unknown little country, where you'll have more possibilities but where you'll become lost to the rest of the world." Barmaid:"What canon is there to back up the idea that Muggleborns must "leave the Muggle World" and be confined withing the WW??" Jim: There isn't any "must" about it; Muggleborns *do* leave the mundane world for the magical world, _at least part time._ We've seen Hermione, for example, spending ten months a year in the wizard world for five years now. What we don't know much about is how a Muggleborn lives her life or his life after Hogwarts. I agree with Del that most Muggleborn wizards almost surely do spend most or all of their time in the wizard world. That's their education, their skill, and being magical is the thing that sets them apart from the Muggle world outside. It'd actually be difficult to go back much; the new wizard has to hide what he is, where he's been, and what he can do; in the Muggle world, a wizard has a big secret to keep. It's circumstances that keep a new wizard in the wizard world, not any kind of compulsion. I'm sure Muggleborns visit, and shop, and so on in the Muggle world, but it would be awfully hard to really "go back." Jim Ferer barmaid agian: Well, you know what they say you can never "go back". But I did not read Del to be saying what Jim is saying. Del is suggesting that in choosing to send their children to Hogwarts Muggle parents are limiting their world, not opening it wider. Jim seems to be agreeing with Alla upthread (who Del is disagreeing with) Here is what Alla said that got snipped: That is exactly what I had been saying in the similar discussion we had earlier - I see the majority of Muggle parents doing exactly that - choosing to send their children to school, they may not know much or even afraid of in order for their children to develop their talents. Or again picking from analogy close to me - just as many middle-aged immigrants decide to immjigrate primarily for the sake of their children. OK, may be this is not the exact analogy, since parents often go with the children. But still many parents go to the unknown country, knowing that they really won't have much possibilities to develop their professional lives there, but their children will have the world opened for them. Back to barmaid: I agree more with Alla. _And_ I do not see anything in canon that makes the Muggle world "lost" to Muggleborn magical children, as Del suggests. Rather, as Jim suggests, I think the magical world is likely to be a place these type of children will find appealing and will want to make their home. As Jim says . "at least part time". I think the immigrant experience as Alla talks about it, the gifted child experience which started this thread, and maybe even foreign adoption all may have some value as analogy here none of them being perfect analogies there _are no_ perfect analogies but they can give us some handles to use to get at the experience of Muggleborn children or the other way round . --barmaid From dontask2much at yahoo.com Wed Dec 1 00:36:54 2004 From: dontask2much at yahoo.com (charme) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 19:36:54 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Trusting characters Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs References: Message-ID: <003b01c4d73d$dc0c3160$6701a8c0@MITRE.ORG> No: HPFGUIDX 118918 From: "arrowsmithbt" > Oh, and being Imperioed can happen > to even the most trustworthy types and so isn't taken into > consideration. > > Major characters: > > DD - sneaky, devious as hell, manipulative, but a goody > Moody > Molly > Arthur > Ron > Hermione - unless someone sneaky offers to free the Elves > in return for a small favour > Neville > MM > Hagrid > Snape - yes, he can be trusted 100% > Lupin - 90% sure > Peter - 50/50 at the moment > > Those I don't trust: > Harry - he's got a bit of Voldy in his head > Sirius > Bagman > Fudge > Lockhart charme: Ok, Kneasy, I'll bite. :) WHO on the list do you suspect has been Imperio'd? I notice we all talk about AK's and Neville's parents being Crucio'd, but we don't talk about who all could have been Imperio'd, and that curse is referenced a good deal: part of a lesson w/ Fake!Moody, performed several times on Harry himself plus Bode and Podmore, both Ministry officials. Mulciber, a DE, is said to be a specialist in the curse. Speak of which and whom, is it out of the question that *maybe* Mulciber (he fought in the DoM in OoP) used his Imperius curse on someone who then hit Sirius causing him to fall through the Veil...hmmm. Things that make you think... charme From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 1 00:46:39 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 00:46:39 -0000 Subject: Trusting characters Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118919 Valky wrote: > > Peter was supposed to be in hiding and Sirius went to check on > him, which does seem like a flinty notion, someone other than the > *bait* should have been playing protector to Peter. > > > > I am painting JKR into a corner here, it was necessary for Sirius > to be first on the scene for plot reasons, so lets just say that he > was too cocky to know he shouldn't be playing both roles at once. How about that? :D > > Potioncat: > I wouldn't say it's flinty. It's very in character for Sirius. > After all it's not the only time he was supposed to stay put, but > dashed off to join the fray. Carol adds: Exactly. It's in character and not a flint. Sirius is rash and reckless. I can't think of a single instance in which he considered the consequences to himself or others before he acted, including the decision to make Peter the SK. Can anyone come up with one? Carol From mommystery at hotmail.com Wed Dec 1 01:16:54 2004 From: mommystery at hotmail.com (mommystery2003) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 01:16:54 -0000 Subject: Does Viktor Krum become an important character? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118920 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Renee" wrote: > Renee: > I also disagree with you... Has it occured to you that some people > are unable to pronounce certain sounds in foreign languages because > their own language doesn't *have* those sounds? (AFAIK, neither > French nor Bulgarian have the English H-sound.) Sometimes people > simply can't hear a sound foreign to their own language well enough > to reproduce it. Babies and young children can aquire any phonetic > system, but if the language they grow up in lacks particular sounds, > their ability to produce them gradually diminishes and sometimes is > lost altogether. Whether someone will succeed to learn such sounds > at a later age often depends on their ear for music, but that is > something you have or don't have. Would you dislike people for being > tone-deaf? > > Renee I don't dislike anyone who is tone-deaf, nor do I hate Krum because he's a foreigner. I just don't like the character. And yes I do understand some sounds are hard to pronounce in other languages. I speak french and german and while I did have a hard time with the the gutteral g in german, I did finally grasp it. Not as well as a native, but I was able to maintain a conversation. It is Krum's character that I dislike and his not pronouncing Hermione's name correctly is just one little thing that irritates me. Anything Krum did in GoF managed to irritate me, just as anything Draco Malfoy does also irritates me. I just didn't take to that character from the beginning. Ces - who never meant to imply she hated foreigners or didn't understand that some languages are hard to grasp and hope she didn't offend anyone. From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Wed Dec 1 01:31:20 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 01:31:20 -0000 Subject: Does Viktor Krum become an important character? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118921 Ces wrote : "I have no idea why I dislike Krum so much. He just turned me off from the first time he was introduced. Just a feeling..." Del replies : Ah, okay ! I certainly can't criticise that, we all have those characters we like or don't like for no particular reason. Ces wrote : "But they chose a Hogwarts student for him to rescue. I find it hard to believe that they brought in Fleur's (another character I don't like!) sister but couldn't bring in someone Krum has known much longer? This is a magical world after all, and getting a person there wouldn't be too much of an effort." Del replies : I agree that they *could* have brought in someone from Bulgaria. But *why* would they do that, since Viktor was very obviously taken with Hermione ? I mean, why go through all the bother of kidnapping someone in Bulgaria, when they have a perfectly good victim right at hand ? Moreover, Gabrielle is just a little girl, she can be transplanted for a couple of days without problem. But we are not told that Viktor has any siblings or close friends, so maybe the only people he cares about are his parents. As adults, they are not necessarily as free of their moves. For example, they can't miss a day at work just to play a passive part in the TWT. So what I'm saying is that it would have been quite a hassle to bring in someone from Bulgaria, and that this hassle was quite unnecessary since Hermione was perfect for the role. Ces wrote : "My point here is though, most people take time to learn a correct pronounciation of someone's name. And Hermione isn't all that difficult to say after a few times. I know I personally make it a point to find out how to pronounce a difficult name, just as I appreciate it when people do the same with mine! LOL" Del replies : For some reason, many people outside of France don't get my name. It's really not a complicated name, but because it's quite rare, they can't figure it out. I suppose it could be the same for Viktor : Hermione might be too exotic a name for him to get a grasp on. It could also be that the way the narrator describes Viktor's rendition of Hermione's name is not accurate. Maybe Viktor says it correctly, but with such a strong accent that it sounds completely wrong. Ces signed : " Ces - who thinks she and Del will just have to agree to disagree about Viktor Krum!" Del replies : Sure, no problem :-) Del From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Wed Dec 1 01:41:24 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 01:41:24 -0000 Subject: Hogwarts letters Re: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118922 Barmaid wrote : " _And_ I do not see anything in canon that makes the Muggle world "lost" to Muggleborn magical children, as Del suggests. Rather, as Jim suggests, I think the magical world is likely to be a place these type of children will find appealing and will want to make their home. As Jim says . "at least part time"." Del replies : Tell me : what *can* the Muggleborn wizards do in the Muggle world ? I'm not talking holidays or shopping trips, I'm talking living in the MW, contributing to it. Del From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Wed Dec 1 01:54:06 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 01:54:06 -0000 Subject: Slytherin House again. Was: Re: Problem with OotP? (was: Pampering) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118923 Jeanette wrote : " Also by having all types of student-wizards schooled together, each indivdual can see and interact with all kinds of mind-sets perhaps giving them a wider world-view." Del replies : Except that by putting all the Slytherin-minded students together, the Sorting ensures that they will primarily interact only with like-minded people, and that any other mind-set will be presented as coming from the competition. Jeanette wrote : "And there is the last practical, brutal, point, that yes it might be better to have potential dark wizards where they can be known rather than have them grow up hidden in dark corners. Also you can control what they are taught both magically and morally." Del replies : I would agree except that : 1. It doesn't seem like anyone kept an eye on the "gang of Slytherins" that existed during the Marauders' time, since most of them happily turned DE unbeknownst to the rest of the WW. 2. We are not told that the Slytherins are taught any special "ethics and morals" classes or whatever. They just seem to be lumped together at the Sorting, and left to rot together. Unproductive to say the least. Del From stonehenge.orders at verizon.net Wed Dec 1 02:01:00 2004 From: stonehenge.orders at verizon.net (kjirstem) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 02:01:00 -0000 Subject: Hogwarts letters Re: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118924 > barmaid here: > > What canon is there to back up the idea that Muggleborns must >"leave the Muggle World" and be confined withing the WW?? kjirstem: I don't think the magic folk are confined to the WW precisely, but they are effectively cut off from the Muggle world. First, as Jim points out downthread, there is the requirement that the WW be kept secret from Muggles. Then, there is the very different education. Third, the WW uses a different monetary system. All three of these things are part of canon and all work to keep wizards and Muggles separate. For education, we have the Hogwarts curriculum. I don't think too many Muggle employers or universities would find it adequate. Hermione might be able to go to a Muggle college post-Hogwarts, she's smart and works hard and might be able to overcome the lack of a traditional education, but who would admit her? Maybe in the interest of student diversity, and that's about it. Then there is money. There is evidence that folks in the WW aren't too familiar with Muggle money. In GOF (Ch 7) Arthur Weasley needs help figuring out RW money to pay for his campsite, which indicates to me that he doesn't use RW cash often. Now, someone who is raised in a Muggle household will understand Muggle money, but if they are employed in the WW then presumably they are paid in galleons. They can exchange their money at Gringotts, but there is that barrier to easy commerce. So, I don't think it is that wizards are confined to the WW so much as that there are barriers between the WW and Muggle world. And, I think these barriers make the choice quite different from the immigrant or gifted kid scenarios that have been described. kjirstem From aletamay01 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 1 02:06:35 2004 From: aletamay01 at yahoo.com (hogsheadbarmaid) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 02:06:35 -0000 Subject: Hogwarts letters Re: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118925 > Barmaid wrote : " > _And_ I do not see anything in canon that makes the Muggle world > "lost" to Muggleborn magical children, as Del suggests. Rather, as > Jim suggests, I think the magical world is likely to be a place these > type of children will find appealing and will want to make their home. > As Jim says . "at least part time"." > > Del replies : > Tell me : what *can* the Muggleborn wizards do in the Muggle world ? > I'm not talking holidays or shopping trips, I'm talking living in the > MW, contributing to it. > > Del barmaid now: Actually you make a good point. They are not trained in any practical Muggle skills. But having spent their formative years there I think they could, if they wanted or needed to, learn to be useful in the Muggle world. It is not really that I think most Muggleborns would spend a lot of time in the MW... it is just that I don't agree with what I thought you were saying... that entering the WW makes the "world" or "worlds" available to the individual smaller, more narrow... rather than bigger, broader... I do think a Muggleborn magical person... if forced for some reason back into the MW would be able to survive... I think it would be much harder for a Muggleborn magical person who had not been exposed to the WW, who found themselves suddenly thrust into the WW as an adult, to cope. I think the Muggleborn magical person who has gone to Hogwarts has more options in adult life, not less. Of course I agree with you that most often the Muggleborns will be likely to identify primarily as members of the Wizarding Community. I just do not think the decision to enter that world cuts them off from the larger world quiet as much as it seems to me you do. I could be wrong though! Wouldn't be the first time! --barmaid From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Wed Dec 1 02:07:44 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 02:07:44 -0000 Subject: Pronunciations (Re: Does Viktor Krum become an important character?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118926 Kim wrote : "My sense is that Viktor might have done a better job pronouncing "Hermione" in reality, but that JKR was just making a little fun of the situation." Del replies : Oh ! That reminds me of something else. I don't have my book with me, but if you'll recall, when Hagrid goes to get Madame Maxime to show her the dragons, he greets her with (if I remember correctly) "Bong-sewer". Well, believe it or not, but that one had me stumped for a long time. I figured it might be some British saying of some kind. When it finally hit me that Hagrid is trying to say "Bonsoir", I went into a hysterical fit of laughter :-D !! "Dee-john" might have escaped me too, if Hermione hadn't set it straight immediately :-) Del, whose 2-year-old son is daily digesting a mix of French, English and Slovenian, playing the German video game his grandma offered him, and occasionally listening to his great-grandma or the TV speak in Croatian (his dad speaks all those 5 languages, and we figure it's gonna be "like father like son" ;-) From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Wed Dec 1 02:26:03 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 02:26:03 -0000 Subject: Hogwarts letters Re: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118927 Barmaid wrote : "It is not really that I think most Muggleborns would spend a lot of time in the MW... it is just that I don't agree with what I thought you were saying... that entering the WW makes the "world" or "worlds" available to the individual smaller, more narrow... rather than bigger, broader... " Del replies : Well, technically you're right of course : having access to both worlds means that their entire world is bigger. But it's the practical aspect I'm more concerned about. A wizard living in the WW is *in effect* cut off from the MW. He *can* go into the MW, but he will have to take his own measures for that. He will have to change his money, his clothes, maybe even his identity (hard to explain being 150 and alive, for example). Even the simple fact of keeping up to date with what is going on in the MW depends on individual will. There are no official means of learning about Muggle news : no newspaper, no bulletins on the radio. DD makes it clear that he keeps an eye on what's going on in the MW, but that most wizards don't do that. And when Harry is at Privet Drive, he makes sure to get both wizard and Muggle news, but once he's back at Hogwarts, he doesn't care about the Muggle news anymore. There's of course also the Statute of Secrecy. Can you imagine not being able to talk about the WW and magic to members of your extended family or your Muggle friends ? Just having to keep that secret is enough to effectively cut a Muggleborn kid off from the Muggle World. The WW isn't concerned at all with the MW, and a wizard who doesn't make any special effort to keep in touch with the MW will inevitably gradually separate himself from it. The bigger, two-part world, gradually becomes a smaller world again. Del From coriolan at worldnet.att.net Wed Dec 1 02:35:53 2004 From: coriolan at worldnet.att.net (coriolan_cmc) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 02:35:53 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?FILK:_You=92re_Beginning_To_Lack_A_Lot_Of_Quidditch_?= Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118928 For the holiday season..... You're Beginning To Lack A Lot Of Quidditch (OOP, Chap. 19) To the tune of It's Beginning To Look A Lot Like Christmas MIDI and lyrics here: http://www.rienzihills.com/ChristmasSing/beginningtolook.htm THE SCENE: The Quidditch Field. High Inquisitor UMBRIDGE decides upon an appropriate penalty for HARRY and the WEASLEY TWINS for brawling with Draco after the game UMBRIDGE: You're beginning to lack a lot of Quidditch, for I am so strict When inquisitors you displease, my twenty-fifth decree Proclaims I can a lifelong ban inflict You're beginning to lack a lot of Quidditch, Harry, George and Fred I'll enjoy in my office room the presence of your three brooms I've confiscated HARRY. GEORGE & FRED We three were very annoyed by a crack of Malfoy, We attacked that miserable git. Hooch interposed and she so saved his nose and the skull we all longed to split. Dolores then declared we from the GQT must split CHORUS OF SLYTHERINS You're beginning to lack a lot of Quidditch, this should give you pause. The twin Beaters who love to beat are compelled to retreat The Seeker must seek elsewhere for applause You're beginning to lack a lot of Quidditch, time for you to quit And the thing that we Slyths all sing, of how Weasley is our King, Proves a smashing hit! - CMC (who will filk Feliz Navidad as Felix Felicis once Book Six is out) HARRY POTTER FILKS http://home.att.net/~coriolan/hpfilks.htm From ignatia_wildfire at yahoo.com Wed Dec 1 02:35:48 2004 From: ignatia_wildfire at yahoo.com (ignatia_wildfire) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 02:35:48 -0000 Subject: OOP: The unknown power In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118929 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "whizbee2000" wrote: > At the end of the book, it was mentioned that Harry possessed a power > that Voldemort did not. Do you think it's the power to conquer death? I think it was obvious from the way Dumbledore spoke - I believe the power Harry has that Valdermort will never have is LOVE... > I'm going to have to go back and read the book a couple more times to > get all the information in the end. I agree with the earlier post > though, that Harry needs to have a little love in his life. Sirius > was the only "family" he had. I wonder if maybe other family (non > muggle) will be revealed in book six? We still don't know much. Dumbledore says that Petunia is Lily's only living relative, so there must not be others alive. "ignatia wildfire" From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Wed Dec 1 01:59:02 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 17:59:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Hogwarts letters Re: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041201015902.33632.qmail@web53105.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118930 > Del erote : > Tell me : what *can* the Muggleborn wizards do in > the Muggle world ? > I'm not talking holidays or shopping trips, I'm > talking living in the > MW, contributing to it. I agree with Del, muggle born wizards don't have anything to do in the Muggle World, what kind of job could they get? an accountant, an architect, what? they have no training for any muggle job, unless if after Hogwarts they went to muggle high school and college, but who would like to do that? It looks like Wizard kids don't take any muggle classes like math or science, so how can they do anything productive for the Muggle world? OTOH in the Wizard world they can do meaningful chores like fight vampires, teach other children, so many things, so much potential, so why waste it in the muggle world? I'm no trying to say that the MW isn't as good as the WW, they're just different, and in whichever one you grow up in you must stay, with the occasional visits to the other world, of course. Juli, thinking what could I possibly do in the WW From snow15145 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 1 03:52:36 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 03:52:36 -0000 Subject: Hogwarts letters Re: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: <20041201015902.33632.qmail@web53105.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118931 Juli: I agree with Del, muggle born wizards don't have anything to do in the Muggle World, what kind of job could they get? an accountant, an architect, what? they have no training for any muggle job, unless if after Hogwarts they went to muggle high school and college, but who would like to do that? It looks like Wizard kids don't take any muggle classes like math or science, so how can they do anything productive for the Muggle world? OTOH in the Wizard world they can do meaningful chores like fight vampires, teach other children, so many things, so much potential, so why waste it in the muggle world? I'm no trying to say that the MW isn't as good as the WW, they're just different, and in whichever one you grow up in you must stay, with the occasional visits to the other world, of course. Snow: Have we all forgotten that Hogwarts has a specific class in Muggle Studies that Hermione got a 320% in? (POA) Hogwarts by offering this class does not appear to dismiss the muggle world or what it may have to offer. Hermione wouldn't have been the only child that took Muggle Studies or the class would have been cancelled for lack of interest. Could Hermione or any child from a muggle background survive in the muggle world, I would tend to agree that they could, if they wanted to! None of the muggle background children that we have met have been discouraged from attending Hogwarts and none have considered going home even after the basilisk incident where muggles were the prime target. From snow15145 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 1 04:02:36 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 04:02:36 -0000 Subject: Questions Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118932 I have a few questions that most likely have been discussed in the past; of course the search engine we have renamed as Yahoomort has been of little help: (1)Nearly Headless Nick is the Gryffindor house ghost. The Sorting Hat claims of Gryffindor's traits: "You might belong in Gryffindor, where dwell the brave at heart, their daring, nerve, and chivalry set Gryffindor's apart" (SS The Sorting Hat) but in OOP The Second War Begins: Nick tells Harry "I was afraid of death," [ ] "I chose to remain behind " If the house's ghost had the traits belonging to their house, why was Sir Nicholas afraid to die? Isn't bravery and chivalry equal to fearlessness like when Harry dashes off without a thought to his own safety? It seems quite odd that Nick was in Gryffindor when he didn't display such qualities. (2)If the Dursley's are so against anything having to do with magic, why was Dudley allowed to watch a magician on television? SS The Letters From No One: Dudley whining to his mother "It's Monday [ ] The Great Humberto's on tonight. I want to stay somewhere with a television." I may be wrong to think that the Great Humberto is a magician but it sounds awfully similar to the Great Houdini. Also it sounds as though this were a regiment of Dudley's weekly routine. I realize that the Dursley's are more than permissive when it comes to Dudley but when it comes to the dirty "M" word and the possibility that Harry might be influenced if he were to see the magician program, why was Dudley allowed to watch it? (It is the small somewhat insignificant details I tend to question) (3)Why do the 3rd year students need a permission form signed by their guardians to visit Hogsmeade but the children who were underage participants of the 2nd task in Goblet, i.e. Hermione, Gabrielle, Ron, did not need to inform their parents or have permission, wouldn't this task be more dangerous than Hogsmeade? (4)Why does it appear that Harry is protected from everyone while living with the Dursley's except Dudley? Why can Dudley use Harry as a punching bag but Vernon received a shock when he touches Harry? Voldemort, in the graveyard, claims that he is so protected at the Dursley's that not even he can touch him there, but Dudley can. (5)Neville's father was an auror and both of Neville's parents were in the Order but what was Neville's mother's occupation, something Gran didn't approve possibly like the Department of Mysteries where one of Harry's parents worked perhaps? There were quite a few spies for Voldemort on the inside of the Ministry. How else would Voldemort have known who was pregnant or who just had a baby? (Not front-page news stories) Just a few small things I've been questioning until we can savor of every scrumptious bite of book six. Snow "So when you hear someone sneer at the Harry Potter books, either they haven't read them, and are therefore too ignorant to be listened to, or they haven't understood them, and are therefore not clever enough to take part in serious adult conversations."-- Orson Scott Card From azriona at juno.com Wed Dec 1 04:36:34 2004 From: azriona at juno.com (Sharon) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 04:36:34 -0000 Subject: Harry's Protection (was Re: Questions) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118933 > Snow: > (4)Why does it appear that Harry is protected from everyone while > living with the Dursley's except Dudley? Why can Dudley use Harry as > a punching bag but Vernon received a shock when he touches Harry? > Voldemort, in the graveyard, claims that he is so protected at the > Dursley's that not even he can touch him there, but Dudley can. > My first instinct would be that Dudley is a blood relative of Harry, while Vernon technically is not. (Vernon, who married Petunia, has no blood ties to Harry at all. He's only a relative by marriage.) My second instinct is to ask when Vernon touched Harry and received a shock, because I don't remember that happening? I would assume that touch would have been in anger, as well - otherwise every time anyone brushed up against Harry they'd have received some sort of shock, and that includes Hermione or Ron, which certainly would have been mentioned in the books. Perhaps the terms of the spell only work if someone is touching Harry in anger? --azriona From azriona at juno.com Wed Dec 1 04:42:25 2004 From: azriona at juno.com (Sharon) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 04:42:25 -0000 Subject: Did Snape work for Dumbledore from Day One? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118934 In post 118796, Kneasy asked me to give my reasons for why Snape could have been a spy for Dumbledore from Day One. Let me first say that it wasn't originally my idea - my friend Noel came up with it one day while we were throwing obnoxious ideas back and forth to each other in a futile attempt to avoid work. It's just this particular idea had enough merit to stick. However, after writing this up I showed it to Noel, and she heartily approves of it. So I feel good enough about it to post it here. Happy Reading! (And beware, it's over 10 pages in MSWord...) * Uncover!Snape From GoF, Chp 30: "Er," [Harry] said, "Mr Bagman " " has never been accused of any Dark activity since," said Dumbledore calmly. "Right," said Harry hastily, staring at the contents of the Pensieve again, which were swirling more slowly now that Dumbledore had stopped adding thoughts. "And er " But the Pensieve seemed to be asking his question for him. Snape's face was swimming on the surface again. Dumbledore glanced down into it, and then up at Harry. "No more has Professor Snape," he said. Harry looked into Dumbledore's light blue eyes, and the thing he really wanted to know spilled out of his mouth before he could stop it. "What makes you think he'd really stopped supporting Voldemort, Professor?" [/quote] What indeed. Except the question I would pose to Harry is "What makes you think he'd ever really supported Voldemort in the first place?" Oh, sure ? the quick and easy answer is that Snape had joined the Death Eaters ? but we do not know why he joined them, or when. Just as we do not know at what point he returned to Dumbledore's flock and began to use his position to spy on Voldemort. I am going to attempt to prove that the reason that Dumbledore trusts Severus Snape completely is not because Snape turned toward him, against the Death Eaters, but that Snape never actually left, and went into the Death Eaters for the sole purpose of being a spy for Voldemort. But first, I have to show you that Snape and Dumbledore's association goes back far longer than the fourteen years that Snape has worked at Hogwarts: in fact, their partnership goes back to before The Prank. THE PRANK. The facts, as we know them, about the Prank itself are fairly scanty, and come mostly by third person. We know that Sirius Black sent Snape into the Whomping Willow, and that before being dragged back out by James Potter, he managed to catch a glimpse of Remus Lupin in werewolf form. Says Remus in PoA Chp 18: "He was forbidden by Dumbledore to tell anybody " But why would Snape listen to Dumbledore in this instance? Sirius himself says that Snape was "trying to find out what we were up to hoping he could get us expelled." (PoA, Chp 18) Finally, Snape has an air-tight excuse to get at least two of the boys expelled from Hogwarts: Remus Lupin because he is technically classified as a dangerous animal, and Sirius Black for luring him to that animal's lair in an attempt to kill him. "Your saintly father and his friends played a highly amusing joke on me that would have resulted in my death if your father hadn't got cold feet at the last moment," Snape tells Harry (PoA, Chp 14). "Had their joke succeeded, he would have been expelled from Hogwarts." Surely, if a joke that results in the death of a student deserves expulsion, a joke that merely puts that student's life in danger should warrant some sort of punishment. And yet ?we have no proof that any of them were punished. In fact, James Potter ? who Snape believed to have been in on the plan ? was made Head Boy later in his Hogwarts career. This must have been a hearty blow to Snape's ego ? the boy he believed had tried to kill him was suddenly laden with honor. We know that Dumbledore favors the Gryffindors now ? there is no reason to doubt that he would have done so earlier in his career, either. Snape must have seen Dumbledore's protection of Potter and his friends as yet another show of favoritism toward a house that had always been seen as nobler than Slytherin. Therefore, simply forbidding Snape to keep Remus' werewolf status a secret would not have had any impact on the boy, unless for some reason Snape respected Dumbledore enough to keep silent. There are theories out there which say that Dumbledore may have blackmailed Snape into keeping silent ? what if it was not blackmail, but a show of deference? If Snape and Dumbledore had already been working together in some fashion, then it would make sense for Snape to be so willing to keep quiet about the werewolf. Even if Snape did not understand why it was important to allow Sirius and Remus to remain at Hogwarts, he would have been quicker to believe that Dumbledore had the best of intentions in doing so. As well, if there was a pre-existing partnership between the two, had Dumbledore publicly shown that he believed Severus Snape's accusations, it would have given their relationship more weight than simply professor and student (because such an admission of a werewolf at school would certainly be public, not just to the school at large who would notice the absence of two of the most popular students but to the media who would jump on the story and broadcast it to the greater world). Their names would be forever linked together. Normally, this would not be a bad thing. But had their names been publicly linked together from that moment, it would have been very difficult for Voldemort to trust Snape completely and totally as a Death Eater. "Sirius Black showed he was capable of murder at the age of sixteen," Snape says to Dumbledore (PoA Chp 21). "You haven't forgotten that, Headmaster? You haven't forgotten that he once tried to kill *me*?" ("Me" is in italics in the original.) Snape has every right, of course, to take the previous murder attempt seriously ? after all, he was the intended victim. But the emphasis on "me" is interesting. Surely he trusts that Dumbledore remembers the events of the Prank ? why does he make it so personal again, in front of not only the Trio but Cornelius Fudge? What message is he trying to convey to Dumbledore with these words ? and more so, what feelings is he attempting to kick-start in Dumbledore (for during this entire conversation, Snape has been staring at Dumbledore's eyes, a key component of Occlumency). What is Snape looking for? "He once tried to kill *me*." Is this simply the pain of the victim of a prank that luckily went awry? "He once tried to kill *me*." Or is it Snape's way of saying, "He tried to kill someone important to you once before, you know. *Me.* Imagine if he had succeeded! Are you going to take that chance again?" Dumbledore replies, "My memory is as good as it ever was, Severus." Dumbledore is essentially telling Severus that not only does he remember the events that occurred nearly twenty years previously, but he is also asking that Severus remember himself the reasons for why he chose to remain quiet about the werewolf. "My memory is good ? please make sure yours is as well, and *remember* why I do this." The words must have had some sort of effect, because the next thing that happens is Snape breaking eye contact leaving the room, without another word. Dumbledore obviously trusts Snape currently in the books ? as he had done following the Prank. Whether or not Dumbledore actually "forbade" Snape to discuss the werewolf (Remus's words, and Remus was likely still in werewolf form when the order to Snape was given, and thus would have received this information second-hand, or at the very least, after the fact), Snape kept the secret for nearly twenty years. Not only did Snape live up to the trust Dumbledore put in him at that time, but his very silence shows a modicum of respect toward Dumbledore, in that he was *willing* to keep that information to himself. If Severus Snape had really and truly felt that Dumbledore was doing a disservice to him by allowing Remus and Sirius to remain at Hogwarts, he would have told about the werewolf. Had there not been a pre-existing relationship between the two, Snape would never have been able to reach the level of trust required for him to return to Dumbledore as a Death Eater and become a spy. Why, after being betrayed in this fashion, would Snape have ever gone to Dumbledore for help? There must have been some sort of bond between the two before the Prank occurred. Whether this bond was intensified or weakened by the events of that night are uncertain ? but it had been forged long ago. OCCLUMENCY There is no proof that Dumbledore taught Snape Occlumency. (Trust me. I've looked.) What's more, there is no evidence for when Snape might have learned the art, although the following things are certain: Occlumency and Legilimency, while they go hand in hand, are not necessarily indicators of the other. Legilimency is the art of reading feelings and memories, whereas Occlumency is the art of blocking those feelings and memories from someone else. Theoretically, if you one know, you can do the other, but there seems to be a distinction between the two. We know that Snape is an Occlumens, and we know that he can perform the Leglimens spell. We also know that Voldemort is a Legilimens, and that Dumbledore can teach Occlumency. (Whether or not you choose to assume that Voldy is also an Occlumens, and that DD is skilled at Legilimency, is totally up to you. I prefer to think both of them can handle whatever. I would further make the argument that Barty Crouch Jr is at least a passable Occlumens, because neither Snape nor Dumbledore were able to discern that he and not Mad-Eye Moody were teaching at Hogwarts during Harry's fourth year.) As far as we know, Legilimency and Occlumency are not on the general schedule for Hogwarts students, so it's probably something you have to learn from someone else. There do not appear to be any books about the art (otherwise you can be sure that Snape would have assigned them to Harry, along with forty-inch essays on each chapter). Therefore, Snape must have learned it from someone else. There are three possibilities: 1. Snape learned Occlumency from Dumbledore. 2. Snape learned Occlumency from Voldemort, and told Dumbledore about it later. 3. Snape learned Occlumency from someone else, and told Dumbledore about it later. Dumbledore, on the other hand, is known for teaching Occlumency. Sirius's first reaction to learning about Harry's lessons is to ask why Dumbledore isn't teaching Harry. Dumbledore himself poses the same question at the end of OoP. While Snape is described as a "suberb Occlumens" (by Remus, Chp 24), when Dumbledore's abilities as an Occlumens are mentioned, it is as a *teacher* only. Even Snape admits that had it been his choice, he would rather not be the one teaching Harry the skill. (Although how much that has to do with his dislike of Harry as opposed to who is really the better teacher of the art is really up to interpretation.) No matter who taught who when, there can be no doubt that Snape and Dumbledore are comfortable enough with their own skills to use them to communicate with each other. Each of them has a fairly complete and total understanding of the other, to the point where often, words need not be spoken. In GoF, Chp 36: "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 glistened 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. [/quote] For such an important task as the one Snape is undoubtedly about to embark upon, there seem to be very few words spoken. In his conversation with Sirius, Dumbledore is quite clear about what Sirius is to do. He lays out Sirius' destinations and goals, and gives instructions on where Sirius is to wait. There can be no doubt to anyone in the room what Sirius' destination is going to be. Snape, on the other hand, doesn't receive a single word of command, instead being told that he already knows the role he should play. There are a few possibilities to this. Granted, Dumbledore admittedly had very little time to discuss with Sirius the chance of Voldemort's return, much less what Sirius would need to do in such an eventuality; whereas Snape and Dumbledore have had fourteen years to discuss it, in every conceivable situation. As well, Snape has been keeping Dumbledore informed of the Dark Mark's return on his arm, and so they are both more than likely prepared to work quickly in that eventuality ? although likely, neither expected it to happen during the Final Task. Thus, when it happened, there would have been no need for words, since both would know what was necessary for each to do. However, there are enough clues in this exchange to imagine that both men are reading each other as they speak. The advantage of being a Legilimens is that you can read other people very easily ? if not their thoughts precisely, then you can at least get an idea of what they're feeling. Therefore, the words you use in speaking to that person ? no matter what verbal answer you expect to receive ? can give you a lot of information in how the person initially reacts to them. Dumbledore and Snape both know this ? and in fact, Snape has used this method before when accusing Harry of stealing from his supply cabinet or going into Hogsmeade without permission. "If you are ready if you are prepared," asks Dumbledore. Is this concern for Snape's preparedness, or is he attempting to trigger some sort of defensive mechanism in Snape's psyche? Perhaps reminding him to empty his mind of thoughts and feelings to prepare for the onslaught of Voldemort's rage. "I am," Snape replies, without preamble and without explanation, and certainly without a hint of protest. And it is evident that the impact of what he is about to do has hit him ? he is paler, and his eyes "glistened strangely." No matter the discussions from before, it is *now* that it hits Snape what is expected of him. These two words are not simply acquiescence of Dumbledore's will, they are a pledge of loyalty to Dumbledore, and an acknowledgement of the danger of what he is about to do. In fact, Dumbledore has been reading Snape's feelings for an extremely long time. "Funny, the way people's minds work, isn't it?" he says in SS/PS Chp 17. "Professor Snape couldn't bear being in your father's debt." And later, after Snape has lost the Order of Merlin for saving Harry and his friends from the werewolf: "Oh, he's not unbalanced He's just suffered a severe disappointment." (PoA Chp 22) Quote: "I trust Severus Snape," said Dumbledore simply. (OoP, Chp 37) [/quote] Dumbledore understands how Snape feels toward not only James and Sirius, but toward Harry and more than likely toward himself. Likewise, Snape knows that Dumbledore is self-assured and confident. "While *he* may feel secure enough to use the [Dark Lord's] name," Snape mutters, rubbing his Dark Mark (OoP Chp 24). There is a certain amount of resentment here. And in fact, there are a thousand reasons why Snape *should* resent Dumbledore ? yet this resentment shows only now, as Snape rubs his Dark Mark ? does he resent the Mark itself, or the man who put it there? And perhaps was it Dumbledore, and not Voldy, who had done so? SNAPE THE SPY FOR WHO? >From OoP Chp 24: "Do not say the Dark Lord's name!" spat Snape. "Professor Dumbledore says his name," said Harry quietly. "Dumbledore is an extremely powerful wizard," Snape muttered.[/quote] This is an interesting moment for many, many reasons, not the least of which is that shortly thereafter does Snape talk about how DD is secure enough to use Voldy's full name. (Chances are pretty good that Snape doesn't know that Dumbledore is on a first-name basis with Voldy either; such knowledge would probably send the poor Potions Master to his grave.) Here, we see Snape's bitterness shine through. We see Snape rub his Dark Mark (regretfully?). We hear Snape admit his own lack of confidence in himself. And we hear Snape call DD "Dumbledore." This last one is more telling than you'd think. When discussing Dumbledore with Harry, Snape generally refers to him as the "Headmaster." Even in conversation with Dumbledore himself, Snape refers to him as "Headmaster." In fact, he may very well be the *only* person in canon to call Dumbledore by this deferential title ? every one else calls him Professor Dumbledore. Why, in this one moment of regret and bitterness, does Snape let the title drop? Again ? can we be sure that the regret and bitterness isn't aimed at Dumbledore himself? It's an odd emotion toward someone who seems to be the only one to trust Severus Snape ? after all, most people in the wizarding world still see him as an ex-Death Eater. No matter that he was a spy, no one seems to think that Snape can be trusted. In GoF Chp 30: "Snape has been cleared by this council," said Crouch disdainfully. "He has been vouched for by Albus Dumbledore." Harry turned to look at Mad-Eye Moody. He was wearing a look of deep skepticism behind Dumbledore's back. [/quote] Here, we learn that Dumbledore gave sufficient proof to the Wizengamot to clear Snape of the charges against him as a Death Eater ? however, it's obvious that Crouch doesn't believe it, and in fact may be somewhat annoyed by Snape's release. Moody more than likely feels the same way, judging from the expression on his face. In fact, Moody may not just feel that Snape could still harbor sympathy for the Death Eaters and their cause ? he may not agree with Dumbledore's decision to use Snape as a spy in the first place. Again, we've seen that Moody is extremely vocal about many people, both in the trial scenes (in which he has something to say about every person who stands up) and about the photograph of the original Order in OoP. The only two people that Moody does not say a single word about are Peter Pettigrew and Severus Snape. Interesting. Very interesting. To return to an earlier quote (GoF Chp 36): "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. [/quote] That trace of apprehension intrigues me. Dumbledore seems affected by Severus leaving the room in his service, far more than he does when Sirius or Bill Weasley had gone ? and yet they were going into equally potentially dangerous situations. There is a definite bond here between them ? more so than simply Headmaster and Professor. This apprehension ? concern, on Dumbledore's part ? seems almost to border on parental affection. "Several minutes before Dumbledore spoke " Yes, and when he did, it was to excuse himself as quickly as possible, though there was certainly a good deal left to say. Why does Dumbledore leave so quickly at this point? What is going through his mind that is so consuming that he cannot speak for fear of it coming out by accident? TO TELL THE TRUTH The concept of trust is one that has been brought up in various threads over the last few days, specifically in regards to Sirius. Much has been made over whether or not the readers should trust Sirius, but little has been made of who in canon trusts him or not. After all, at the end of GoF, Dumbledore sends Sirius to various old Order members to tell them of what has happened and to gather them in service again ? but according to these very same members, Sirius was the traitor who turned in Lily and James. Either Dumbledore has already informed these people (Figg and Fletcher are mentioned, as is Lupin, who of course already knows) of Sirius's innocence, or he is taking on faith that when Sirius Black turns up on their doorstep with a fantastical tale about rats and fingers, that they will trust him. And the funny thing is, as far as we know, they do. Mad-Eye Moody as well seems to trust Sirius ? at least, he doesn't show any sign of *not* trusting him, and Moody is the king of "constant vigilance". (It really should be engraved on his tombstone.) One of the few characters who does not trust Sirius is Severus Snape ? although with very good reason. Remember that Snape still believes, at the end of GoF, that Sirius was the Secret Keeper. He was not awake for Pettigrew's reappearance, and did not believe the story that Harry and Hermione told after the fact. Is it any wonder, then, that his first reaction to Sirius's appearance in the hospital wing after the Final Task was "one of mingled fury and horror"? (GoF Chp 36) Dumbledore replies, "I trust you both You are on the same side now." What does Dumbledore mean by "now"? Haven't they been on the same side for at least fifteen years at this point? Another quote (GoF Chp 30): "I have given evidence already on this matter," [Dumbledore] 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." [/quote] There you have it, from the horse's mouth. Dumbledore says, not in merely one place, but in two, that Snape was once upon a time on the other side. He says this before the Wizengamot, about how Snape became a spy. He says this to Sirius, in convincing him to take Snape's hand. Well, gosh. Because Dumbledore *couldn't* lie, could he? Could he? Play with me for a moment. If Dumbledore was to admit, "Why, yes, I did ask Severus Snape to go join the Death Eaters, as my spy, and he did, and isn't it grand that everything worked out for the best?" Yeah, because *that* would have gone over splendidly. For the *same* reasons that Dumbledore and Snape could not have their association known after the Prank, Dumbledore cannot show himself to have any predetermined association with Snape now. He says himself that he does not believe that Voldemort is gone forever. He cannot have anyone know that he and Snape had long since planned the deception ? by allowing Snape the cover of a Death-Eater-Turned-Good, he is allowing Snape an escape route with Voldemort, as it were. Voldy would be extremely angry with a Death Eater who turned ? but if a man turns once, he can turn again. A Death Eater who had joined him for the sole purpose of betrayal probably doesn't stand a chance. And in fact, we don't know that this plan didn't work. After all, we have no proof that Voldy knew that Snape was a spy at the time of the graveyard scene in GoF. The only person who could have told him then was Bertha Jorkins or Peter ? Bertha probably didn't know, as she likely wasn't in the trials, and Peter spent most of that time as a rat, either trying to find safe haven or already at the Weasleys, where he obtained it. The Weasleys were unaware of Snape's status as a spy, and therefore it is highly unlikely that Peter would have learned this information while he was there. Let's look at what Voldy says, upon reflection of his missing Death Eaters: "One, too cowardly to return he will pay. One, who I believe has left me forever he will be killed of course and one, who remains my most faithful servant, and who has already reentered my service." (GoF, Chp 33) It's a fairly safe bet that Snape is not at this gathering. He was attending the Final Task at the Quidditch Pitch, too far away from Hogwarts' borders to easily or quickly Apparate when his Mark began to burn. I'll admit there's an outside chance that he managed it, and is one of the nameless Death Eaters which Voldy passes without comment, but I sort of doubt it. So let's look at these three. The common interpretation is as follows: Cowardly ? Karkaroff, who ran the moment the Mark burned; Left Forever, therefore must die ? Snape, who turned to DD; Faithful Servant ? Crouch Junior, who waited in the form of Moody. Makes sense. All on the up and up. Fits the profile. Complete rubbish ? when you remember that chances are extremely good that Voldy doesn't know that Snape has turned to Dumbledore. In addition, the one thing that Peter *can* tell Voldy about Snape is that he's working at Hogwarts. And if we assume that Voldy's read his copy of "Hogwarts: A History", he'll know that you can't Apparate from Hogwarts! Therefore, Voldy *must* realize that it would be impossible ? not to mention foolish ? to attempt to reach Voldy immediately. "Left forever" could easily apply to Karkaroff. Cowardly could just as easily apply to Snape, who has taken refuge under Dumbledore's wing for the past fourteen years. GoF Chp 30: "What makes you think he'd really stopped supporting Voldemort, Professor?" Dumbledore held Harry's gaze for a few seconds, and then said, "That, Harry, is a matter between Professor Snape and myself." [/quote] But not for long. --azriona From norek_archives2 at hotmail.com Wed Dec 1 04:45:24 2004 From: norek_archives2 at hotmail.com (Janet Anderson) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 04:45:24 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118935 Snow asked: >If the house's ghost had the traits belonging to >their house, why was Sir Nicholas afraid to die? Isn't bravery and >chivalry equal to fearlessness like when Harry dashes off without a >thought to his own safety? It seems quite odd that Nick was in >Gryffindor when he didn't display such qualities. Well, Peter Pettigrew was in Gryffindor too. :( I think Sir Nicholas probably is brave and just had a moment of weakness. Let us hope his moment of weakness didn't lead him to become a traitor, as it did Peter. >(4)Why does it appear that Harry is protected from everyone while >living with the Dursley's except Dudley? Why can Dudley use Harry as >a punching bag but Vernon received a shock when he touches Harry? >Voldemort, in the graveyard, claims that he is so protected at the >Dursley's that not even he can touch him there, but Dudley can. I don't know, but it may be that Dudley is immune to the protection because he's of Harry's mother's blood (being Petunia's son). Possibly Petunia could have hit him with that frying pan if she'd had better aim, but Vernon can't touch him because he isn't a blood relation. Janet Anderson From snow15145 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 1 04:58:19 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 04:58:19 -0000 Subject: Harry's Protection (was Re: Questions) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118936 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Sharon" wrote: > > > Snow: > > (4)Why does it appear that Harry is protected from everyone while > > living with the Dursley's except Dudley? Why can Dudley use Harry > as > > a punching bag but Vernon received a shock when he touches Harry? > > Voldemort, in the graveyard, claims that he is so protected at the > > Dursley's that not even he can touch him there, but Dudley can. > > > > My first instinct would be that Dudley is a blood relative of Harry, > while Vernon technically is not. (Vernon, who married Petunia, has > no blood ties to Harry at all. He's only a relative by marriage.) > > My second instinct is to ask when Vernon touched Harry and received a > shock, because I don't remember that happening? I would assume that > touch would have been in anger, as well - otherwise every time anyone > brushed up against Harry they'd have received some sort of shock, and > that includes Hermione or Ron, which certainly would have been > mentioned in the books. Perhaps the terms of the spell only work if > someone is touching Harry in anger? > > --azriona Snow: The blood relative synopsis works for me because Voldemort after becoming somewhat related by his rebirth from Harry's blood, could now touch him. If this is true then the Dursley's are no longer a protection at all! From nrenka at yahoo.com Wed Dec 1 05:03:09 2004 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 05:03:09 -0000 Subject: Did Snape work for Dumbledore from Day One? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118937 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Sharon" wrote: > > In post 118796, Kneasy asked me to give my reasons for why Snape > could have been a spy for Dumbledore from Day One. Let me first > say that it wasn't originally my idea - my friend Noel came up with > it one day while we were throwing obnoxious ideas back and forth to > each other in a futile attempt to avoid work. It's just this > particular idea had enough merit to stick. This is very well argued, if rather speculative--necessarily, though. So I'll make my objection (because I like playing devil's advocate) on thematic grounds. Make Snape have been on the side of the angels all along, having gone to spy at Dumbledore's behest, and you take all genuinely messy thematic meaningful potential BANG out of his story--not to mention putting George and Diana out of a job. It's too clean, too neat. It means that Snape doesn't have any truly deep guilt or responsibility, or really anything to be too sorry for-- he was always working for the good guys. It really destroys the crux of the character (for me, at least), that he is something of a penitent, having gone over to the Dark Side, and having returned, at great risk to himself (as he switched sides when it looked like the Dark Hats were winning). Severus Snape is compelling, such as he is, because he has genuinely done Bad Things, and is likely genuinely converted away from at least some of the Bad Things--although you'll note per interview that there are things Dumbledore won't let him do. Compelling!Snape needs to have struggled with himself and his own worst inclinations, as (I think) he is still doing at the present in many regards. I suppose that this could be pulled off, textually. It'd really be something of a let down, I think. Doesn't seem to mesh terribly well with the general strain of JKR's commentary on the character. Some people may not take such commentary seriously, but I tend to. Unless someone can point out to me where she's lied to us so far. :) -Nora crashes into her nice, cozy, goose-down comforter-ed bed From snow15145 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 1 05:05:19 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 05:05:19 -0000 Subject: Questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118938 Snow asked: >If the house's ghost had the traits belonging to >their house, why was Sir Nicholas afraid to die? Isn't bravery and >chivalry equal to fearlessness like when Harry dashes off without a >thought to his own safety? It seems quite odd that Nick was in >Gryffindor when he didn't display such qualities. Janet Anderson replied: Well, Peter Pettigrew was in Gryffindor too. :( I think Sir Nicholas probably is brave and just had a moment of weakness. Let us hope his moment of weakness didn't lead him to become a traitor, as it did Peter. Snow: I had taken into account Peter but big but he isn't dead yet! We may not know or realize to what extent his inner-Gryffindor has been seen. From ignatia_wildfire at yahoo.com Wed Dec 1 02:49:36 2004 From: ignatia_wildfire at yahoo.com (ignatia_wildfire) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 02:49:36 -0000 Subject: OOP: Ch 28 - What Draco saw In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20030622232740.02da29f8@mail.pasiphae.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118939 Pasiphae wrote in message #61906: > Upon opening the door to Snape's office, Draco sees Harry and Snape > standing with their wands out. Now Ignatia: Funny enough my first thought would be that Snape and Harry are dueling. If Draco also thought that, he might have considered two main circunstances where this could be happening: - Harry is having dueling classes with Snape (the professor who apparently hates him) - Harry was supposed to be having Remedial Potions, but a discussion broke off and both teacher and pupil pulled their wands out for a duel. Draco doesn't seems to be specially bright, that is probably what he thought. But if he suspected the first... he might have reported it to his father, instead of spreading it around school. As for spreading it, didn't Zacharias already know? Maybe it was old news, except maybe for Slytherins, who don't seem to hang out with the others students much... -Ignatia From ignatia_wildfire at yahoo.com Wed Dec 1 03:20:20 2004 From: ignatia_wildfire at yahoo.com (ignatia_wildfire) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 03:20:20 -0000 Subject: Harry the Hero of 1000 faces In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118940 Besides all the valid discussion points as to why Harry had be to raised by the Dursleys - and suffer - there is one point that was not raised and that is much more mundane... The story calls for it... Harry is going through the steps of "The Hero of One Thousand Faces", as described by Joseph Campbell in one of his famous books. This same story line was the foundation of the first Star Wars movie - and well, how far has George Lucas wandered from this. But "The Hero of One Thousand Faces" is born with some inate or hereditary talent / blood line / secret powers. At an early age he loses his parents and is raised by "normal people". This step is essential in his formation, because it's here that he learns what it is to be poor / without powers. Or what it means to be kind, or cruel, or whatever knowledge that will be essential in his quest. In his teens his legacy is revealed, he receives special objects and / or guidance of a mentor. He sets out in a Quest where he must prove his courage / intelligence / powers. He conquers the enemy / retrieves whatever was stolen / kills the dragon, and RETURNS home. You can rest assured that whatever Harry learned with / from the Dursleys is / will be essential to conquering Voldemort in the end... -Ignatia From spaced_out_space_cadet at hotmail.com Wed Dec 1 06:00:56 2004 From: spaced_out_space_cadet at hotmail.com (spacedoutspacecadet) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 06:00:56 -0000 Subject: The Darkness Within In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118941 Jeane said: > Remember in Lord of the Rings, the same thing was said of Gollum > by Gandulf: what in fact happened was Gollum bit Frodo's finger off > to steal the ring. That turned out to be a good thing but it > doesn't come under "I owe this guy so I will help him out." type of > act. It may be Peter tries something nasty that turns out to be > helpful. Hey everyone, Thanks for replying. I do like the whole Lord of the Rings similarity and it does seem a possible thing to happen, though I do have to wonder (after she has received a lot of criticism for other similarities) if she would do that. Then again it would be just like Peter to try something nasty, fail miserably and end up doing something heroic. I personally am not a fan of little old Peter and as such would love to see Remus while in wolf form tear him to shreads! However that brings into question the whole problem with the silver hand, something that I know has been discussed in great detail... so I wont get on that topic. I do suppose that I should have lumped Fudge into the 'good' characters with darker sides, any thoughts on what will happen to him?? Anyway thanks for the thoughts! Spaced Out Space Cadet :):) From jhnbwmn at hotmail.com Wed Dec 1 06:47:37 2004 From: jhnbwmn at hotmail.com (johnbowman19) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 06:47:37 -0000 Subject: Mad Eye the Traitor Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118942 Sturgis Podmore was convicted of trespassing at the MOM. If we believe Ron's account of how this happened, Malfoy put him under Imperius Curse. But Podmore had invisibility cloak, so how could this happen? I suggest that Mad eye is how it happened. He is the only character we are told who can see through invisibility cloaks, should we believe that Malfoy got a lucky shot off with the Imperius Curse? I don't think so. It would be almost impossible to cast a curse on someone you could not see, so how could Malfoy do it to Podmore? It is simple really, he could not do it. The only person who could do it is Mad eye Moody. But wait you may say "Mad eye has fought against dark wizards all his life". To this I would reply "He got tried of fighting and decided a despot is what the WW needs". Why would Malfoy use the Imperius Curse on a hunch in a building full of Arurors? He wouldn't. At that time he had the ear of the minister and would not want to do anything that would damage his position, so he would not use the Imperius Curse. For this reason I say Mad eye is a traitor. We do not know what Moody does for the OoTP, so it is perfectly plausible that he could be a traitor. Plus the fact that he was under Barty's Imperius Curse for so long, he could know a Death eater's mind and like it. Moody is the one to keep your eye on in the last two books. John who thinks Moody is a rat. From azriona at juno.com Wed Dec 1 06:50:15 2004 From: azriona at juno.com (Sharon) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 06:50:15 -0000 Subject: Did Snape work for Dumbledore from Day One? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118943 Nora: > Make Snape have been on the side of the angels all along, having gone > to spy at Dumbledore's behest, and you take all genuinely messy > thematic meaningful potential BANG out of his story--not to mention > putting George and Diana out of a job. > > It's too clean, too neat. It means that Snape doesn't have any truly > deep guilt or responsibility, or really anything to be too sorry for-- > he was always working for the good guys. It really destroys the crux > of the character (for me, at least), that he is something of a > penitent, having gone over to the Dark Side, and having returned, at > great risk to himself (as he switched sides when it looked like the > Dark Hats were winning). > You're absolutely and totally right, actually. Take away Snape's propensity toward evil and he suddenly becomes Dudley Do-Right with worse hair. But my theory can still stand on its own merit - simply because DD *asked* Snape to join the DEs does not mean that possibly Snape would not have joined them eventually otherwise - nor does it preclude the possibility that while Snape was with them, he may have (temporarily, perhaps) been swayed to their line of thinking. Remember, DD does not give Snape the DADA job for a reason. As I don't have the books with me (I'm at work, currently), I can't give the exact quote (and I think it's from an interview with JKR anyway), but DD is afraid that the DADA position will bring out the worst in Snape. If DD is worried about this, then obviously there is a part of Snape which is possibly more cruel/evil/vindictive than what we have already seen. > Nora: > Severus Snape is compelling, such as he is, because he has genuinely > done Bad Things, and is likely genuinely converted away from at least > some of the Bad Things--although you'll note per interview that there > are things Dumbledore won't let him do. Compelling!Snape needs to > have struggled with himself and his own worst inclinations, as (I > think) he is still doing at the present in many regards. His feelings and attitudes toward Harry being top of the list, certainly. > > I suppose that this could be pulled off, textually. It'd really be > something of a let down, I think. Doesn't seem to mesh terribly well > with the general strain of JKR's commentary on the character. Nope. But like you, I enjoy playing Devil's Advocate, and this is such a fun theory, it's difficult to dismiss so readily. > Nora: Some > people may not take such commentary seriously, but I tend to. Unless > someone can point out to me where she's lied to us so far. :) > Lied, no. Misdirected, yes. Could this be another misdirection? Maybe. It's worth considering, anyway. --azriona From gbannister10 at aol.com Wed Dec 1 07:45:07 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 07:45:07 -0000 Subject: Pronunciations (Re: Does Viktor Krum become an important character?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118944 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: Del: > Oh ! That reminds me of something else. I don't have my book with me, > but if you'll recall, when Hagrid goes to get Madame Maxime to show > her the dragons, he greets her with (if I remember correctly) > "Bong-sewer". Well, believe it or not, but that one had me stumped for > a long time. I figured it might be some British saying of some kind. > When it finally hit me that Hagrid is trying to say "Bonsoir", I went > into a hysterical fit of laughter :-D !! > > "Dee-john" might have escaped me too, if Hermione hadn't set it > straight immediately :-) Geoff: These didn't escape me because there are a few examples in English of French being corrupted - often it's a hangover from troops in the First World War. A couple which spring to mind are the conversion of the town of "Ypres" into "Wipers" and a phrase you still hear from elderly folk here is "san fairy ann" meaning "don't worry about it" which is, if my French hasn't totally deserted me, a distortion of "ce ne fait rien". English is riddled with this sort of linguistic erosion. One of the National Trust's biggest estates, just a couple of miles from me, is the Holincote Estate which, in the hands of locals becomes "Hunnycutt" - it even gets a mention in Bill Bryson! Geoff http://www.aspectsofexmoor.com Exmoor National Park views, walks and West Somerset Railway steam and diesel views From gbannister10 at aol.com Wed Dec 1 07:59:41 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 07:59:41 -0000 Subject: Harry's Protection (was Re: Questions) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118945 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Sharon" wrote: --azriona: > My second instinct is to ask when Vernon touched Harry and received a > shock, because I don't remember that happening? I would assume that > touch would have been in anger, as well - otherwise every time anyone > brushed up against Harry they'd have received some sort of shock, and > that includes Hermione or Ron, which certainly would have been > mentioned in the books. Perhaps the terms of the spell only work if > someone is touching Harry in anger? Geoff: Back to canon... '- but before he coud draw himself up to full height, the top of his head collided with the Dursley's open window. The resultant crash made Aunt Petunia scream even louder. Harry felt as though his head had been split in two. Eyes streaming, he swayed, trying to focus on the street to spot the source of the noise but he had barely staggered upright when two large purple hands reached through the window and closed tightly round his throat. "Put - it - away!" Uncle Vernon snarled into Harry's ear. "Now! Before - anyone - sees!" "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 al electric shock. Some invisible force seemed to have surged through his nephew, making him impossible to hold.' (OOTP "Dudley Demented" p.10 UK edition) Geoff http://www.aspectsofexmoor.com Exmoor National Park views, walks and West Somerset Railway steam and diesel views From azriona at juno.com Wed Dec 1 08:42:22 2004 From: azriona at juno.com (Sharon) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 08:42:22 -0000 Subject: Harry's Protection (was Re: Questions) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118946 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Sharon" wrote: > > --azriona: > > My second instinct is to ask when Vernon touched Harry and received > a > > shock, because I don't remember that happening? I would assume > that > > touch would have been in anger, as well - otherwise every time > anyone > > brushed up against Harry they'd have received some sort of shock, > and > > that includes Hermione or Ron, which certainly would have been > > mentioned in the books. Perhaps the terms of the spell only work > if > > someone is touching Harry in anger? > > Geoff: > Back to canon... > > '- but before he coud draw himself up to full height, the top of his > head collided with the Dursley's open window. The resultant crash > made Aunt Petunia scream even louder. > > Harry felt as though his head had been split in two. Eyes streaming, > he swayed, trying to focus on the street to spot the source of the > noise but he had barely staggered upright when two large purple hands > reached through the window and closed tightly round his throat. > > "Put - it - away!" Uncle Vernon snarled into Harry's ear. "Now! > Before - anyone - sees!" > > "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 al > electric shock. Some invisible force seemed to have surged through > his nephew, making him impossible to hold.' > > (OOTP "Dudley Demented" p.10 UK edition) Ah! I forgot about that. All the same, though - had the spell put on Harry for his protection prevented *anyone* from touching him in anger, shouldn't Vernon have been shocked immediately, and not after a few seconds of struggle? I'm almost inclined to say that the force which prevented Vernon from holding on was a surge of power in Harry himself, and had little to do with the magic protecting him from harm. (Although because that same surge was concurrent with "a particularly nasty throb" in his scar, I'm willing to accept that it's an indication of something more sinister.) --azriona From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Wed Dec 1 09:45:21 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 09:45:21 -0000 Subject: Trusting characters Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: <003b01c4d73d$dc0c3160$6701a8c0@MITRE.ORG> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118947 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "charme" wrote: > > > Oh, and being Imperioed can happen > > to even the most trustworthy types and so isn't taken into > > consideration. > > > > Ok, Kneasy, I'll bite. :) WHO on the list do you suspect has been > Imperio'd? I notice we all talk about AK's and Neville's parents being > Crucio'd, but we don't talk about who all could have been Imperio'd, and > that curse is referenced a good deal: part of a lesson w/ Fake!Moody, > performed several times on Harry himself plus Bode and Podmore, both > Ministry officials. Mulciber, a DE, is said to be a specialist in the curse. > Ah! You noticed my attempt to insert a little doubt into the mind of the reader. No; I don't believe that any of them have been Imperioed - yet. But I think one or more of them will be. And it will be one of the youngsters. I've mentioned it before, but it won't hurt to bring it up again: Crouch!Moody - the Unforgivables lesson. The readers were mostly concentrating on how Harry was throwing of the Imperio curse. But it showed something else, too. Now how many noticed that a passing comment told us that there were some that were perhaps a little more vulnerable than average - Ron, for example, skipping long after the lesson had finished - "Moody assured him the effects would wear off by lunchtime". Oh, yes! A nod's as good as a wink to a blind horse. I've a great respect for JKR's sneakiness and she's got very good at foreshadowing future events with unregarded little hints. So it's on my little list of things to watch out for. "Vigilance! Constant Vigilance! Kneasy From eloiseherisson at aol.com Wed Dec 1 09:46:46 2004 From: eloiseherisson at aol.com (eloise_herisson) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 09:46:46 -0000 Subject: Did Snape work for Dumbledore from Day One? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118948 What a very enjoyable, well-argued post, Sharon! Let me first say that I agree totally with the comments that Nora made in response, http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/118937 although I think this is the first time that George and Diana have been credited with having anything to do with Bang! Nora's post sums up my thematic objections to this theory, so I'll confine myself to comments on some specific points to do with the relationship between Snape and Dumbledore. Sharon: > But first, I have to show you that Snape and Dumbledore's association > goes back far longer than the fourteen years that Snape has worked at > Hogwarts: in fact, their partnership goes back to before The Prank. Eloise: I certainly think that they have a relationship that goes back that far, but I wouldn't call it a partnership exactly, certainly not in the early days. Sharon: > THE PRANK. > "Your saintly father and his friends played a highly amusing joke on > me that would have resulted in my death if your father hadn't got > cold feet at the last moment," Snape tells Harry (PoA, Chp 14). "Had > their joke succeeded, he would have been expelled from Hogwarts." > > Surely, if a joke that results in the death of a student deserves > expulsion, a joke that merely puts that student's life in danger > should warrant some sort of punishment. And yet ?we have no proof > that any of them were punished. In fact, James Potter ? who Snape > believed to have been in on the plan ? was made Head Boy later in his > Hogwarts career. This must have been a hearty blow to Snape's ego ? > the boy he believed had tried to kill him was suddenly laden with > honor. Eloise: I am sure that this *was* a huge blow to Snape. I have argued in the past that this was the pivotal event which sent Snape into the arms of Voldemort. If one as apparently good and wise as Dumbledore could let such a crime go unpunished (Snape being unable to understand such a capacity to forgive), then was there really such a difference between Light and Dark, Good and Evil? Why not just join the side potentially most advantageous to oneself? Dumbledore's actions could be seen as the actions of one afraid to use power; Snape became convinced of the same argument that Quirrell had: "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. " Sharon: > We know that Dumbledore favors the Gryffindors now ? there is no > reason to doubt that he would have done so earlier in his career, > either. Snape must have seen Dumbledore's protection of Potter and > his friends as yet another show of favoritism toward a house that had > always been seen as nobler than Slytherin. Eloise: Hmm. You can certainly argue Dumbledore's favouritism, but I'm not sure there are really grounds, except for the dreadful rubbing -the- Slytherins'-noses-in-it scene at the end of PS/SS. I am sure that whatever your house, you regard it as the most noble (unless, perhaps you're a Hufflepuff). We see things largely from a Gryffindor viewpoint. Chapter 6 of OoP is entitled, "The Noble and Most Ancient House of Black". Views of what is noble (or in another case "disgrace the name of wizard") vary according to your standpoint as is pointed out in the altercation between Malfoy and Arthur in PS/SS.. Sharon: > Therefore, simply forbidding Snape to keep Remus' werewolf status a > secret would not have had any impact on the boy, unless for some > reason Snape respected Dumbledore enough to keep silent. There are > theories out there which say that Dumbledore may have blackmailed > Snape into keeping silent ? what if it was not blackmail, but a show > of deference? Eloise: I'm not sure that blackmail is quite Dumbledore's style. But if saying, "Breathe a word of this and you're out" is blackmail, then I guess I could go with it. ;-) Sharon: > If Snape and Dumbledore had already been working together in some > fashion, then it would make sense for Snape to be so willing to keep > quiet about the werewolf. Even if Snape did not understand why it > was important to allow Sirius and Remus to remain at Hogwarts, he > would have been quicker to believe that Dumbledore had the best of > intentions in doing so. Eloise: My long standing belief about Snape and Dumbledore's relationship has been reinforced by the snap shot we see in OoP. Father-son relationships are a constant theme throughout the books. We have absent or dead fathers. We have fathers who do their best and fail. We have fathers idolised by their sons and fathers demonised by them. I have always believed that Snape had an essentially absent father, either in the sense of his being physically absent, or emotionally detached from his son. We certainly aren't given any idea that Snape had a warm, close knot family life (and I would suggest that all those curses he knew on entering Hogwarts might relfect his hatred of his father, on whom he would have liked to inflict them, they might certainly be a reflection of unhappiness as much as anything else). On entering Hogwarts, I believe that for the first time, Snape was presented with a strong male figure, the most powerful wizard of his day, no less, to whom he could look up. Whatever Snape's own magical predilections, Dumbledore's power must have had some attraction for a boy who himself had such strong magical potential and ambition. If factoring in a large ego, here also was someone *worthy* of being his father, though actually I don't go along with that as I think Snape has a pretty damaged ego and the posturing and outward pride is a mask for that. I also believe that Dumbledore in some way or other cares for all the students in his care, even the Crabbes and Goyles and this attitude of care from an older man was something which snape had not encountered before. As Transfiguration teacher, Dumbleldore had seen another very bright, capable boy from an unhappy background and in need of a father figure sorted into Slytherin House. He watched him as he grew in power and was allowed to develop in full those Slytherin traits which eventually led to his transformation into Lord Voldemort. I think he decided not to make the same errors of omission with this new boy. And that, to me, is what their relationship is all about. Dummbledore is Snape's surrogate father and snape his difficult, sometimes waywards, son. The ties may sometimes be stretched to breaking point, but they are still there and both knows that ultimately the other is there for them. I see it constantly in their interaction. As I do also in Snape's behaviour towards Harry, though obviously this is not reciprocated (no-one said that fathers have to be good). Sharon: > "Sirius Black showed he was capable of murder at the age of sixteen," > Snape says to Dumbledore (PoA Chp 21). "You haven't forgotten that, > Headmaster? You haven't forgotten that he once tried to kill *me*?" > ("Me" is in italics in the original.) > "He once tried to kill *me*." Is this simply the pain of the victim > of a prank that luckily went awry? > > "He once tried to kill *me*." Or is it Snape's way of saying, "He > tried to kill someone important to you once before, you know. *Me.* > Imagine if he had succeeded! Are you going to take that chance > again?" Eloise: I'm sorry, but I'm afraid I take this at face value, simply "me" as opposed to "him". Sharon: > Dumbledore replies, "My memory is as good as it ever was, Severus." > Dumbledore is essentially telling Severus that not only does he > remember the events that occurred nearly twenty years previously, but > he is also asking that Severus remember himself the reasons for why > he chose to remain quiet about the werewolf. "My memory is good ? > please make sure yours is as well, and *remember* why I do this." > > The words must have had some sort of effect, because the next thing > that happens is Snape breaking eye contact leaving the room, without > another word. Eloise: Equally, he might be telling him that he remembers everything including all that Snape confessed to him when he returned, prodigal like, to the fold. Or even, he's just saying, "For goodness Sakes Severus, how many times do we have to go over this? Will you never accept my decision?" Because this is a constant theme of their relationship: Snape disagrees with or doubts Dumbledore's judgment, sometimes to the extent of even acting alone in ways that he must know Dumbledore would disapprove of, yet their fundamental relationship never seems to falter. They don't always trust each other's judgment, but they trust each other. Sharon: > > If Severus Snape had really and truly felt that Dumbledore was doing > a disservice to him by allowing Remus and Sirius to remain at > Hogwarts, he would have told about the werewolf. Eloise: I confess that this is troubling me. He could so easily have let slip. However, it would have had very serious consequences, including the possibility that Dumbledore himself would have had to leave the school. As an ambitious young man, Snape might have regarded it in his own best interests not to rock the boat and lose the opportunity to become the most powerful wizard he could. Rmember that he did not know that he was going to find out that Remus was a werewolf, that he was going to find out one of *Dumbledore's* secrets. Sharon: Had there not been > a pre-existing relationship between the two, Snape would never have > been able to reach the level of trust required for him to return to > Dumbledore as a Death Eater and become a spy. Why, after being > betrayed in this fashion, would Snape have ever gone to Dumbledore > for help? > > There must have been some sort of bond between the two before the > Prank occurred. Whether this bond was intensified or weakened by the > events of that night are uncertain ? but it had been forged long ago. Eloise: Definitely a bond. And a knowledge that Dumbledore was the one person who would be willing to hear his side of the story, be willing to forgive, be willing to give a second chance. And of course, although Dumbledore apparently didn't punish Sirius and James, neither do we have any indication that he ever showed any prejudice toward Snape for attempting to get him as much as Remus into trouble. I would love to carry on to the next section of your post, but time presses and this essentially covers my view of the relationship. ~Eloise From MadameSSnape at aol.com Wed Dec 1 09:52:31 2004 From: MadameSSnape at aol.com (MadameSSnape at aol.com) Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 04:52:31 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Hogwarts letters Re: Choosing sides Message-ID: <1f2.2ddf89c.2edeee5f@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118949 In a message dated 11/30/2004 10:57:38 PM Eastern Standard Time, snow15145 at yahoo.com writes: None of the muggle background children that we have met have been discouraged from attending Hogwarts ============== Sherrie here: IMHO, the key phrase is "that we have met". Obviously, the ones we have met HAVE chosen to go to Hogwarts - but we have no way of knowing what percentage of Muggleborns that actually represents. There could be twice, thrice, or ten times that number who decide otherwise, or whose parents won't permit them. We don't know. As for being able to survive in the Muggle world after Hogwarts - I can't see how most of them would have enough of a grounding in Muggle skills to do so. Unless old Justin Finch-Fletchley spends his summers taking programming courses or auto mechanics - I doiubt very much such things are taught in Muggle Studies, nor can I see much of what IS taught at Hogwarts to be translatable to the Muggle world. I haven't seen too many ads for Transfiguration Specialists or Potions Masters in the local papers recently... :-) Sherrie (off to Gettysburg in about a half-hour!) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From azriona at juno.com Wed Dec 1 10:34:58 2004 From: azriona at juno.com (Sharon) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 10:34:58 -0000 Subject: Did Snape work for Dumbledore from Day One? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118950 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "eloise_herisson" wrote: > > What a very enjoyable, well-argued post, Sharon! > Thanks! > Eloise: > Let me first say that I agree totally with the comments that Nora > made in response, > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/118937 > > although I think this is the first time that George and Diana have > been credited with having anything to do with Bang! > I shall play stupid for a moment, and confess that I don't have a clue who George & Diana are, or what Bang is, being somewhat new over here - or at least, new to the boards. > Eloise: > I certainly think that they have a relationship that goes back that > far, but I wouldn't call it a partnership exactly, certainly not in > the early days. > I had trouble coming up with a word to define the relationship, actually. It's not a friendship, exactly - it's more than an acquaintance, and relationship to me implies things of a sexual nature, which is *definately* not what I was aiming at! "Partnership", to me, seems about right. They were both in league to bring down Voldy - at least, originally, they were. I think it probably grew into the father-son thing we see now later, after Snape was working at Hogwarts. > Eloise: > I am sure that this [the Prank} *was* a huge blow to Snape. I have argued in the > past that this was the pivotal event which sent Snape into the arms > of Voldemort. If one as apparently good and wise as Dumbledore could > let such a crime go unpunished (Snape being unable to understand such > a capacity to forgive), then was there really such a difference > between Light and Dark, Good and Evil? Why not just join the side > potentially most advantageous to oneself? Yes! Even before Noel and I started in on this theory, I'd thought the Prank had severe implications in Snape's turn toward Voldy. And certainly, the line between Black and White (Good and Evil) in JKR grows murkier with every book. One can do good things for the wrong reasons (such as Harry saving all of the captives in the Second Task); one can do equally wrong things for good reasons (such as Sirius giving the SK position to Peter). As for joining the most advantageous side: that would be Peter's agrument to Sirius and Remus, who don't buy it. PoA, Chp 19: "He - he was taking over everywhere!" gasped Pettigrew. "Wh - what was there to be gained by refusing him?" "What was there to be gained by fighting the most evil wizard who has ever existed?" said Black, with a terrible fury in his face. "Only innocent lives, Peter!" [/quote] > Eloise: > Hmm. You can certainly argue Dumbledore's favouritism, but I'm not > sure there are really grounds, except for the dreadful rubbing -the- > Slytherins'-noses-in-it scene at the end of PS/SS. > Views of what is noble (or in another case "disgrace > the name of wizard") vary according to your standpoint as is pointed > out in the altercation between Malfoy and Arthur in PS/SS.. The scene at the end of PS/SS is the one I was thinking of when I wrote that line, actually. And I grant that as we see the world through Harry's eyes, we get a very lopsided view of any sort of favoritism anyone would show. We know how Snape treats the Gryffindors as compared to the Slytherins; but how does he treat the Ravenclaws and the Hufflepuffs, who surely take their Potions classes together? And if he were teaching a joint Slytherin-Ravenclaw class, would he be so forgiving of the Slytherins when he needn't worry about how the Gryffindors will take it? The same, I think, is much the same for Dumbledore, who is largely removed from the daily workings of the school, at least at the classroom level. I'm actually kind of curious if we're ever going to see Dumbledore teach a class, and how he would treat the students on that playing field. > Eloise: > I'm not sure that blackmail is quite Dumbledore's style. But if > saying, "Breathe a word of this and you're out" is blackmail, then I > guess I could go with it. ;-) Me neither. I do think if he had used blackmail, it would have been of the variety you mention. He has used some level of...convincing before, however, in regards to getting Kreacher to tell him Sirius' whereabouts at the end of OoP. (Honestly, this sort of Dumbledore goes straight into whatever Puppetmaster theories are out there, which I will readily admit that I'm not very well read on.) > Eloise: Dummbledore > is Snape's surrogate father and snape his difficult, sometimes > waywards, son. The ties may sometimes be stretched to breaking point, > but they are still there and both knows that ultimately the other is > there for them. I see it constantly in their interaction. As I do > also in Snape's behaviour towards Harry, though obviously this is not > reciprocated (no-one said that fathers have to be good). > Oooo, yes, exactly. There is absolutely a very strong and caring relationship between Snape and Dumbledore - perhaps more caring from DD's side than Severus but no less intense. And regardless of whether or not you believe that Snape has been working for DD all along, I think that such a bond only strengthened after Voldy's fall. > Sharon: > > > "Sirius Black showed he was capable of murder at the age of > sixteen," > > Snape says to Dumbledore (PoA Chp 21). "You haven't forgotten > that, > > Headmaster? You haven't forgotten that he once tried to kill > *me*?" > > ("Me" is in italics in the original.) > > > "He once tried to kill *me*." Is this simply the pain of the > victim > > of a prank that luckily went awry? > > > > "He once tried to kill *me*." Or is it Snape's way of saying, "He > > tried to kill someone important to you once before, you know. > *Me.* > > Imagine if he had succeeded! Are you going to take that chance > > again?" > > Eloise: > I'm sorry, but I'm afraid I take this at face value, simply "me" as > opposed to "him". > I can deal. *grin* A lot of this theory requires a serious leap of faith. > Eloise: Because this is a constant theme of their > relationship: Snape disagrees with or doubts Dumbledore's judgment, > sometimes to the extent of even acting alone in ways that he must > know Dumbledore would disapprove of, yet their fundamental > relationship never seems to falter. They don't always trust each > other's judgment, but they trust each other. Yes, and I think Snape even likes to hear it now and again. He needs the reassurance, and Dumbledore is always willing to give it to him. We have very rarely seen Dumbledore tell Snape "I don't agree with you," but in nearly every confrontation, we see Snape argue with Dumbledore, who smiles and (proverbally) pats Snape on the head and tells him how smart he is, but that he'd rather do this other thing instead. (Usually that other thing invovling not punishing Harry Potter, who more often than not deserves it.) This just reminds me again of how many people in the world must *not* trust Snape, in order to cause in him such a complex that he demands the constant reassurement that he really is good enough, smart enough, and gosh darn it, DD likes him (even if no one else does). > > Sharon: > > > > > If Severus Snape had really and truly felt that Dumbledore was > doing > > a disservice to him by allowing Remus and Sirius to remain at > > Hogwarts, he would have told about the werewolf. > > Eloise: > I confess that this is troubling me. He could so easily have let > slip. However, it would have had very serious consequences, including > the possibility that Dumbledore himself would have had to leave the > school. As an ambitious young man, Snape might have regarded it in > his own best interests not to rock the boat and lose the opportunity > to become the most powerful wizard he could. Good point. And perhaps this is something DD reminded him of, as well. Although, had Snape not been connected to DD in some way at this point, then Snape wouldn't have been much concerned at DD's removal, would he? Anyway - Snape did let the information slip, at the end of PoA, although I suspect this was more because he felt betrayed once again by DD for believing Harry and Hermione's story, not punishing them, and allowing Sirius to go free. After all, Snape had been hoping for expulsion in the matter of James and Sirius when he originally went after Remus Lupin - and in PoA, he asks for nothing less than suspension. Yet neither of these punishments were handed out to any party. Dumbledore says that Snape had suffered a "severe disappointment" - would that disappointment have caused Snape to mention Remus' status as werewolf, thereby resulting in his removal from Hogwarts? (Perhaps as a defiant gesture to DD as well: "Look, here, I do have some power over others, Old Man, you can't completely be the boss of me. Thhhhbbbt. Hand over the cookies.") --az/Sharon, who refuses not to have fun while promoting conspiracy theories, nor is all that protective of the lemon cookies in the kitchen From Snarryfan at aol.com Wed Dec 1 10:41:42 2004 From: Snarryfan at aol.com (evita2fr) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 10:41:42 -0000 Subject: Harry's Protection (was Re: Questions) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118951 > > Geoff: > Back to canon... > '- but before he coud draw himself up to full height, the top of > his > head collided with the Dursley's open window. The resultant crash > made Aunt Petunia scream even louder. > > Harry felt as though his head had been split in two. Eyes >streaming, > he swayed, trying to focus on the street to spot the source of the > noise but he had barely staggered upright when two large purple > hands > reached through the window and closed tightly round his throat. > > "Put - it - away!" Uncle Vernon snarled into Harry's ear. "Now! > Before - anyone - sees!" > > "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 al > electric shock. Some invisible force seemed to have surged through > his nephew, making him impossible to hold.' > > (OOTP "Dudley Demented" p.10 UK edition) azriona: > Ah! I forgot about that. All the same, though - had the spell put > on Harry for his protection prevented *anyone* from touching him in > anger, shouldn't Vernon have been shocked immediately, and not after > a few seconds of struggle? I'm almost inclined to say that the force > which prevented Vernon from holding on was a surge of power in Harry > himself, and had little to do with the magic protecting him from harm. > > (Although because that same surge was concurrent with "a particularly > nasty throb" in his scar, I'm willing to accept that it's an > indication of something more sinister.) > There is harm and harm. I think Vernon received a shock because he was trying to *kill* Harry. Until there, Dudley and Petunia (with the pan) 'only' tried to hurt Harry. This time, the risk of death was playing in the protection. (Maybe the prophecy mean that anyone can hurt Harry, badly, but not kill him, safe if you're Voldie.) And I think the throb came from when his head collided with the Dursley's open window. Christelle From gbannister10 at aol.com Wed Dec 1 10:51:54 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 10:51:54 -0000 Subject: Harry's Protection (was Re: Questions) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118952 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Sharon" wrote: --azriona > Ah! I forgot about that. All the same, though - had the spell put > on Harry for his protection prevented *anyone* from touching him in > anger, shouldn't Vernon have been shocked immediately, and not after > a few seconds of struggle? I'm almost inclined to say that the force > which prevented Vernon from holding on was a surge of power in Harry > himself, and had little to do with the magic protecting him from harm. > > (Although because that same surge was concurrent with "a particularly > nasty throb" in his scar, I'm willing to accept that it's an > indication of something more sinister.) Geoff: I think I agree with Christelle over the throb not being in the scar. The pain was "in the top of his head" whereas his scar is on his forehead. I think it is possible that his protection was kicking in because it seemed that Vernon was threatening his life - although I doubt that was his intention. it might have been the innate wandless magic magic that had operated previously - the hair, the Zoo, the school roof etc. Geoff http://www.aspectsofexmoor.com for Exmoor National Park views, walks and West Somerset Railway steam and diesel views From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Wed Dec 1 11:36:08 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 11:36:08 -0000 Subject: Harry's Protection (was Re: Questions) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118954 > --azriona > > Ah! I forgot about that. All the same, though - had the spell put on Harry for his protection prevented *anyone* from touching him in anger, shouldn't Vernon have been shocked immediately, and not > after a few seconds of struggle? Valky: I agree with this statement and also the othersthat have been saying that the surge was some form of protection to the threat on Harry's life. Azriona: I'm almost inclined to say that the force which prevented Vernon from holding on was a surge of power in Harry himself, and had little to do with the magic protecting him from harm. > >(Although because that same surge was concurrent with "a > particularly nasty throb" in his scar, I'm willing to accept that it's an indication of something more sinister.) > > Geoff: > I think I agree with Christelle over the throb not being in the scar. The pain was "in the top of his head" whereas his scar is on his forehead. > Valky: It was definitely the collision with the window sill. This passage comes right after Mundungus apparates away from Little Whinging suddenly which makes Harry jump and reach for his wand, as he is crouched below the Dursleys window he collides with it with some force with the top of his head. Geoff: > I think it is possible that his protection was kicking in because it seemed that Vernon was threatening his life - although I doubt that was his intention. it might have been the innate wandless magic magic that had operated previously - the hair, the Zoo, the school roof etc. > Valky: As I have said I entirely agree with the life threatening situation being the cause. However, I find the phrase ...making his nephew impossible to hold.... shouts poignancy, I am not keen to write it off as insignificant yet. Harry has some power that the Dark Lord knows not, and Harry can be *impossible to hold* if his life is threatened. This is twice seen in the books. When LV takes Harry's blood he tests the success of his undermining of the sacrifice ?charm? by *touching* Harry, but does he try to hold him? Can anyone who has GOF at the ready help me on this? My copy is loaned out. From azriona at juno.com Wed Dec 1 12:07:48 2004 From: azriona at juno.com (Sharon) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 12:07:48 -0000 Subject: Harry's Protection (was Re: Questions) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118955 > Valky: > When LV takes Harry's blood he tests the success of his undermining > of the sacrifice ?charm? by *touching* Harry, but does he try to > hold him? Can anyone who has GOF at the ready help me on this? My > copy is loaned out. Chp 34, pg 668 US hardback version: "And Harry ran as he had never run in his life, knocking two stunned Death Eaters aside as he passed; he zigzagged behind headstones, feeling their curses following him, hearing them hit the headstones - he was dodging curses and graves, pelting toward Cedric's body, no longer aware of the pain in his leg, his whole being concentrated on what he had to do - " [/quote] Voldy doesn't hold him, no - he just presses his finger against Harry's cheek. But as Harry runs - I wonder how those DEs got stunned? It's not capitalized, so I suppose we could assume that JKR doesn't mean they've been hit with *Stupify*. Perhaps it was merely running into Harry with an intent to capture and kill that shocked them senseless. As well - all those spells that don't hit Harry. I mean, I know bad guys in movies are supposed to be horrible shots, but this is ridiculous. I think the only thing that might be considered questionable on this count is just afterwards, when Crouch!Moody is "half pulling, half carrying him" back to his office (Chp 35, pg 673 US version). Crouch! Moody certainly intends to kill Harry, yet he seems to have a good enough grip that he doesn't let go of Harry until they've reached their destination. --azriona From willsonkmom at msn.com Wed Dec 1 12:26:32 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 12:26:32 -0000 Subject: OOP: Ch 28 - What Draco saw In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118956 > > Now Ignatia: > Funny enough my first thought would be that Snape and Harry are > dueling. > If Draco also thought that, he might have considered two main > circunstances where this could be happening: > > - Harry is having dueling classes with Snape (the professor who > apparently hates him) > > - Harry was supposed to be having Remedial Potions, but a discussion > broke off and both teacher and pupil pulled their wands out for a > duel. > > Draco doesn't seems to be specially bright, that is probably what he > thought. But if he suspected the first... he might have reported it > to his father, instead of spreading it around school. > > As for spreading it, didn't Zacharias already know? Maybe it was old > news, except maybe for Slytherins, who don't seem to hang out with > the others students much... > Potioncat: I'm not sure it's true that Draco isn't bright. And given how little the different houses interact, Slytherins may not have heard that Harry was taking remedial potions. The first time I read the scene, I thought it was the adults who weren't bright. Anyone who saw Snape and Harry would know they weren't doing remeidal potions. But the point of the cover story was to explain why Harry was going to Snape's office. I'm sure they didn't expect anyone to burst into Snape's office. Of course he could have locked the door each time Harry came in, but this list would be on fire if he had done that! So Draco ran in, Snape probably thought, "Oh, Heck!" (or something along that line.) But he remained calm and gave the cover story, which of course Draco was happy to swallow. Then he directed Draco back to the reason for being there. Montague's situation was bad enough for Draco and Snape to be distracted. And off they went. You're right though, if later, Draco savors the thought of Harry Potter having to take remedial potions, you would think he would question the wands. We don't know if he did, or if it had gone completely out of his mind with the other happenings. On the other hand, add the wands, Snape's lack of support for Umbridge, the strange interaction between Snape and Harry in Umbridge's office and Draco might begin to wonder about his Head of House. From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Wed Dec 1 12:27:11 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 12:27:11 -0000 Subject: Harry's Protection (was Re: Questions) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118957 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Sharon" wrote: > > > Valky: > > When LV takes Harry's blood he tests the success of his undermining of the sacrifice ?charm? by *touching* Harry, but does he try to hold him? Can anyone who has GOF at the ready help me on this? My copy is loaned out. > [/quote] > > Voldy doesn't hold him, no - he just presses his finger against > Harry's cheek. > Valky: Thankyou for the quote azriona. hmmm interesting and I agree the DE's are *surprisingly* poor shots. I wonder could you look up one more GoF passage for me and tell me what exactly does Harry say to DD before he DD gets the infamous gleam in his eye. azriona: > I think the only thing that might be considered questionable on this count is just afterwards, when Crouch!Moody is "half pulling, half carrying him" back to his office (Chp 35, pg 673 US version). Crouch!Moody certainly intends to kill Harry, yet he seems to have a good enough grip that he doesn't let go of Harry until they've reached their destination. > Valky: Well with this in mind I am willing to carry on the investigation under a presumption that harry needs to *conciously* perceive the threat for the magic to invoke. Thanks again. From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Wed Dec 1 12:38:03 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 12:38:03 -0000 Subject: OOP: Ch 28 - What Draco saw In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118958 > > Now Ignatia: > > Funny enough my first thought would be that Snape and Harry are > > dueling. > > Draco doesn't seems to be specially bright, that is probably what he thought. > > > > > Potioncat: > I'm not sure it's true that Draco isn't bright. And given how > little the different houses interact, Slytherins may not have heard that Harry was taking remedial potions. > > Valky: IMO Draco is a bit of a meathead, certainly not so fast on the uptake to have immediately, or even soon figured out that it wasn't remedial potions, especially as he was being distracted at the time by his position of Power at Hogwarts. OTOH I agree with potioncat, I am not sure its true that Draco isn't bright. Almost certainly as soon as he gives it some thought he will realise something was up that day, and that's not good news for Snape, at all. Draco's Detour around and above the head of Slytherin house, perhaps? From willsonkmom at msn.com Wed Dec 1 12:54:56 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 12:54:56 -0000 Subject: ghosts, magicians and babies was Re: Questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118959 Snow wrote: > > (1)Nearly Headless Nick is the Gryffindor house ghost. snip Isn't bravery and > chivalry equal to fearlessness like when Harry dashes off without a > thought to his own safety? It seems quite odd that Nick was in > Gryffindor when he didn't display such qualities. Potioncat: But we don't know what brave things he faced prior to death. And we've seen Neville who is very frightened fit well in Gryffindor. Quite a few of the housemembers sometimes fall short of reaching the ideal qualities of their houses. (Think twins hissing at a new boy because he was sorted into Slytherin.) A bigger question I think is why the Fat Friar, of all people, would be afraid to go on to the Hereafter. > > (2)If the Dursley's are so against anything having to do with magic, > why was Dudley allowed to watch a magician on television? snip > I > realize that the Dursley's are more than permissive when it comes to > Dudley but when it comes to the dirty "M" word and the possibility > that Harry might be influenced if he were to see the magician > program, why was Dudley allowed to watch it? (It is the small > somewhat insignificant details I tend to question) Potioncat: I think it's one of those exceptions that you always find with rigid people. Magicians are accepted in the Muggle world as being "pretend" not really magic. I'm sure if it had been Harry rather than Dudley who wanted to watch it, they would have said no. And I also think it's a funny little thing JKR put in. I wouldn't be surprised to learn in a later book that the Great Humberto is really a wizard. > > (3)Why do the 3rd year students need a permission form signed by > their guardians to visit Hogsmeade but the children who were underage > participants of the 2nd task in Goblet, i.e. Hermione, Gabrielle, > Ron, did not need to inform their parents or have permission, > wouldn't this task be more dangerous than Hogsmeade? Potioncat: Well, they were supposed to be 17 and that is "of age." But in Harry's case the magical contract was more binding than the human restriction. > >> (5)Neville's father was an auror and both of Neville's parents were > in the Order but what was Neville's mother's occupation, something > Gran didn't approve possibly like the Department of Mysteries where > one of Harry's parents worked perhaps? There were quite a few spies > for Voldemort on the inside of the Ministry. How else would Voldemort > have known who was pregnant or who just had a baby? (Not front- page > news stories) Potioncat: I'm not sure I follow this question. We don't have any clue that I know of about Alice's occupation, nor whether Gram approved of her. And if LV wants to know who had a baby in July, I think it would be easy enough to find out. > > > From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Dec 1 13:27:50 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 13:27:50 -0000 Subject: Trusting characters Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118960 SSSusan: > > But off the hook for WHAT? For reacting as most people would? Or > > is that the crux of it -- that you *don't* believe most people > > would have reacted this way and so he's at fault somehow? Az's reply: > Actually, I think most people in Sirius' situation probably would > freak out and want to verify the safety of their friends. However, > Sirius isn't most people. Sirius is supposed to a soldier in a > *war*. And in *war*, there are rules. At the very least, Sirius > needed to tell someone what he was doing and where he was going > He behaved really irresponsibly ? first by passing off the SK > position to Peter without telling DD, second by not staying away > from Peter to help keep him safe, and third by blundering off to GH > without warning. > > And the fact is that if he'd contacted DD, he would have learned > what had happened ? Sirius was at GH at the *same time* as Hagrid, > who had been sent there by DD. Dumbledore would have listened to > Sirius and might have been able to circumvent Sirius from going > after Peter, thus saving him from 12 years in Azkaban. SSSusan: I confess that this thread is going off in so many directions now that I'm having trouble figuring out just what's being argued. So I'm going to stick to just a couple of small points that I was trying to make. Again, I don't argue that the *wiser* course for Sirius would have been to let DD or someone know he was rushing off to GH. The only possible concern with that is the consideration of their having to set up the SK/FC scheme all over again if it had turned out no one was in trouble. But I noticed I didn't get a response to my question about double- standards here. You'd earlier suggested that Peter might have missed his meeting w/ Sirius because he'd been called away and didn't have time to contact Sirius, but then you're saying Sirius should have taken the time to contact someone before going to GH. To me, they're the same issue. It's a time of war for *both* soldiers, their closest friends' lives are in danger, and EVERYONE should be being cautious and careful to communicate important pieces of info. If Sirius should have let DD know before going off to GH, so should Peter have let Sirius know if he'd been called away. The fact that Peter did NOT contact Sirius is part of what MAKES Sirius' rush off to GH more understandable, imo. [This has nothing to do with your position, really, but the last comment of yours that I included raises that darn question again: HOW did DD know to send Hagrid? Grrrr!] Anyhoo... you say if Sirius had contacted DD, DD would have listened to him. I hope this would have been true, but at this point DD seems to believe that Sirius was the one who betrayed Lily & James. I mean, DD didn't contact *Sirius* after the attack, did he? It's a two-way street of failure to communicate. *Understandable* in both cases, I'd argue [DD assuming Sirius as betrayer; Sirius frantic about Peter's absence and worried about Lily & James], but with tragic consequences in both cases as well. Siriusly Snapey Susan From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Dec 1 14:03:54 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 14:03:54 -0000 Subject: Did Sirius *ever* consider consequences? (was: Trusting characters) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118961 Valky wrote: > > > Peter was supposed to be in hiding and Sirius went to check on > > him, which does seem like a flinty notion, someone other than the > > *bait* should have been playing protector to Peter. Potioncat: > > I wouldn't say it's flinty. It's very in character for Sirius. > > After all it's not the only time he was supposed to stay put, but > > dashed off to join the fray. Carol adds: > Exactly. It's in character and not a flint. Sirius is rash and > reckless. I can't think of a single instance in which he considered > the consequences to himself or others before he acted, including the > decision to make Peter the SK. Can anyone come up with one? SSSusan: I definitely won't argue with you that Sirius was rash & reckless in general, Carol, but I do believe that he did at times consider consequences. What about his decision to actually *answer* some of Harry's questions in chapter 5 of OotP? Haven't lots of us bemoaned the fact that Harry's been kept too much in the dark? That he had proven himself capable of handling the truth by his actions in the previous four years [retrieving the stone, duelling Voldy in the graveyard, etc.] and yet no one would tell him anything, particularly any "whys"? Sirius *wanted* to fill Harry in and managed to do a fair bit of it before being halted. I think this was wise, actually. Siriusly Snapey Susan From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Wed Dec 1 14:10:08 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (Barry Arrowsmith) Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 14:10:08 +0000 Subject: Did Snape work for Dumbledore from Day One? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118962 Good post. I do love devious thinking. Interesting...... Ineffable Dumbledore and Snape behind the mask. There's no doubt that DD and SS are partners, the difficulty is in determining in what enterprises, to what depth, for how long - and why. Is it a marriage of convenience, "my enemy's enemy is my friend" sort of arrangement? Or is it deeper and wider? Mostly I've been content with theorising that something BANGy turned Snape away from Voldy (BTW - BANG usually means some sort of sudden life changing event) and also that he's in league with DD over Harry. The best double act in the business - a "nice cop/nasty cop" duo and that part of Snape's job is to keep a close eye on Harry and keep him out of trouble if possible. Seemingly dogging Harry's footsteps to catch him out is just a plausible excuse that Harry will accept without question. But this is the first time I've been asked to consider that it stretches as far back as you suggest. Hmm. Not so sure about this. Like many I regard the 'Prank' as a defining moment in Snape's development - possibly the single most important event that may/could/did push him towards Voldy. Though even here there's a temptation to become too clever for one's own good, to produce too many alternative explanations. Is it that he wanted revenge on 'Gryffindor' types - "birds of a feather" sort of thing; on James and Sirius *as individuals* no matter who or what they were affiliated with; or against a member(s) of a boodline (the Blacks and maybe the Potters - who let's face it are a total enigma as a family) that was notorious for it's anti-social attitudes and patronising indifference to others - "a pox on all your tribe". Some may think this last is stretching things - but isn't that the rationale behind the belief that Snape hates Harry? That it's because he's the son of his father? Against this is the fact that the 'Prank' was not the centre-piece of "Snape's Worst Memory"; instead we're presented with a piece of teenage embarrassment that while no doubt is uncomfortable to recall, would be expected to pale into insignificance when compared to the 'Prank' with it's (apparent) non-repercussions or with what may have happened whilst he was among the DEs and Voldy. The possibility that Snape's wounds could be salved by Emollient!DD or by maybe an understanding developing between the two was pretty far down the list. Ah well; a re-assessment can't hurt. Of course, it may be possible to argue that being "instructed to forget it" may have involved some sort of magical enforcement, emplaced until the possibility of troublesome sequelae was over. But that's unlikely; my reading of Snape's character would never allow him to forgive something like that. Damn. Once again we're reduced to saying "if we knew what happened then, we'd have a better chance of deducing what's going on here." Mustn't complain though, just think how boring it would be if everything was open and above board. The occlumency/legillimency interplay aspects of the pair has a high probability IMO. The only two apart from Voldy that seem to have mastered the skills - why shouldn't they use it between themselves? Could be used in other situations, too. Snape's 'spying' may include dipping into Malfoy's mind to find out what's new on the DE front. Plus DD fixing Harry with his beady eye - "Are you sure there's nothing you want to tell me, Harry?" Ha! The perfect way to get Harry to bring something to the forefront of his mind. Still, thanks for providing food for thought. Need to ponder, to brood on consequences and ramifications if you're right. That's no hardship. Kneasy From gbannister10 at aol.com Wed Dec 1 14:23:34 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 14:23:34 -0000 Subject: Harry's Protection (was Re: Questions) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118963 > Valky: > Thankyou for the quote azriona. hmmm interesting and I agree the > DE's are *surprisingly* poor shots. I wonder could you look up one > more GoF passage for me and tell me what exactly does Harry say to > DD before he DD gets the infamous gleam in his eye. Geoff: 'When Harry told of Wormtail piercing his arm with the dagger, however, Sirius let out a vehement exclamation; and Dumbledore stood up so quickly that Harry started. Dumbledore walked around the desk and told Harry to stretch out his arm. Harry showed them both the place where his robes were torn and the cut beneath them. "He said my blood would make him stronger than if he'd used someone else's," Harry told Dumbledore. "He said the protection my - my mother left in me - he'd have it too. And he was right - he could touch me without hurting himself, he touched my face." For a fleeting instant, Harry thought he saw a gleam of something like triumph in Dumbledore's eyes. But next second, Harry was sure he had imagined it for when Dumbledore had returned to his seat behind the desk, he looked as old and weary as Harry had ever seen him.' Geoff http://www.aspectsofexmoor.com Exmoor National Park views, walks and West Somerset Railway steam and diesel views From stonehenge.orders at verizon.net Wed Dec 1 14:30:14 2004 From: stonehenge.orders at verizon.net (kjirstem) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 14:30:14 -0000 Subject: Hogwarts letters Re: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118964 > Snow: > > Have we all forgotten that Hogwarts has a specific class in Muggle > Studies that Hermione got a 320% in? (POA) Hogwarts by offering this > class does not appear to dismiss the muggle world or what it may have > to offer. Hermione wouldn't have been the only child that took Muggle > Studies or the class would have been cancelled for lack of interest. > kjirstem: I doubt very much that Muggle Studies makes up for the difference between Muggle and WW education. I assume that Arthur Weasley took it, considering how interested he is in all things Muggle, and his understanding of the Muggle world is a bit flawed. From meriaugust at yahoo.com Wed Dec 1 14:31:20 2004 From: meriaugust at yahoo.com (meriaugust) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 14:31:20 -0000 Subject: Questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118965 Snow asks: > (1)Nearly Headless Nick is the Gryffindor house ghost. The Sorting > Hat claims of Gryffindor's traits: "You might belong in Gryffindor, > where dwell the brave at heart, their daring, nerve, and chivalry set > Gryffindor's apart" (SS The Sorting Hat) but in OOP The Second War > Begins: Nick tells Harry "I was afraid of death," [ ] "I chose to > remain behind " If the house's ghost had the traits belonging to > their house, why was Sir Nicholas afraid to die? Isn't bravery and > chivalry equal to fearlessness like when Harry dashes off without a > thought to his own safety? It seems quite odd that Nick was in > Gryffindor when he didn't display such qualities. Meri: I agree that it seems out of character for a Gryffindor to be afraid to die (as Sirius so obvoiusly wasn't) but fear comes in many shapes and forms. After all, Ron is a Gryffindor and he's terrified of spiders (though he did brave them in CoS to find out about Aragog, brave boy!) and just because NHN ran from death doesn't mean he wasn't exceptionally brave in life. We shouldn't jusdge the character of a person from one act, like we learned in the Pensieve scene in Order. Snow: > (2)If the Dursley's are so against anything having to do with magic, > why was Dudley allowed to watch a magician on television? SS The > Letters From No One: Dudley whining to his mother "It's Monday [ ] > The Great Humberto's on tonight. I want to stay somewhere with a > television." I may be wrong to think that the Great Humberto is a > magician but it sounds awfully similar to the Great Houdini. Also it > sounds as though this were a regiment of Dudley's weekly routine. I > realize that the Dursley's are more than permissive when it comes to > Dudley but when it comes to the dirty "M" word and the possibility > that Harry might be influenced if he were to see the magician > program, why was Dudley allowed to watch it? (It is the small > somewhat insignificant details I tend to question) Meri: Not being British myself, I just assumed that this was some superhero show, and since Harry isn't really allowed to watch television then I don't think the Dursleys are that worried that Harry will catch on to it. Snow: > (3)Why do the 3rd year students need a permission form signed by > their guardians to visit Hogsmeade but the children who were underage > participants of the 2nd task in Goblet, i.e. Hermione, Gabrielle, > Ron, did not need to inform their parents or have permission, > wouldn't this task be more dangerous than Hogsmeade? Meri: Well, technically we don't know whether or not they had permission. We have no actual canon to back it up, but I would assume that DD or MM would have written Hermione's parents and asked the Delacours and the Weasleys and the Changs if it was okay to bewitch their kids for a few hours, with all reassurances of their safety. But, OTOH, classes at Hogwarts are far more dangerous than Hogsmeade and that task (heck, even walking through the halls might leave you with leeks sprouting from your ears!) so maybe it's all just par for the course at Hogwarts. Meri From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Wed Dec 1 14:37:21 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 14:37:21 -0000 Subject: OOP: Ch 28 - What Draco saw In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118966 Valky wrote : "IMO Draco is a bit of a meathead, certainly not so fast on the uptake to have immediately, or even soon figured out that it wasn't remedial potions, especially as he was being distracted at the time by his position of Power at Hogwarts. OTOH I agree with potioncat, I am not sure its true that Draco isn't bright. Almost certainly as soon as he gives it some thought he will realise something was up that day, and that's not good news for Snape, at all. Draco's Detour around and above the head of Slytherin house, perhaps?" Del replies : We don't even need to wonder about Draco's intelligence, because we do know about another trait of his that can spell trouble in this situation: he babbles on and on to his father about Harry. Unless Draco's relationship with his father changed dramatically since CoS, chances are that the boy was only too happy to tell his father that Harry Potter is in need of Remedial Potions. He probably gave a luxury of details to Lucius, about how he saw Harry in Snape's office. It would be a stroke of luck if he forgot to mention the presence of the wands and the suspicious abscence of a cauldron. And even if Draco doesn't see what's wrong about those details, I'm sure Lucius does. So unless for some reason Draco didn't mention that episode to his father, we might have to assume that Lucius knows too much about Snape and Harry's private lessons. Del From stevejjen at earthlink.net Wed Dec 1 15:21:31 2004 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 15:21:31 -0000 Subject: Harry's Protection (was Re: Questions) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118967 Geoff: > I think it is possible that his protection was kicking in because it > seemed that Vernon was threatening his life - although I doubt that > was his intention. it might have been the innate wandless magic magic > that had operated previously - the hair, the Zoo, the school roof etc. Jen: I read this scene as wandless magic, like with Marge, but now realize Fudge would have taken great pleasure in issuing a warning or expulsion notice right away if it was. Protection at the Dursleys is one of my favorite unsolved mysteries. Mainly because Harry doesn't *seem* very protected there. The protection definitely doesn't involve the area around the house because Dobby, the Dementors and Sirius were all able to approach Harry on the streets. So that leaves the house. But then *inside* the house, Dobby was able to enter and Mr. Weasley connected the house to the Floo Network. I don't think the protection would have been lifted in order for those things to occur if the house itself was protected. But if it's Harry himself--that answers some questions! He's not protected from everyone, though. The Dementors almost soul-sucked him in POA, and the Basilisk certainly had a go at him. But then, when you think about all the instances Harry was in a tight spot, he was always able to save himself with somewhat extraordinary measures. His skin saved him in SS/PS, his loyalty to Dumbledore (his choice) saved him in COS; his time-turned self cast the Patronus in POA; in GOF his courage and strength pushed the beads back, creating the Phoenix song which 'increase courage in the pure of heart.' FBAWTFT (This last example is a little iffy, but I can't believe that every set of brother wands would create the protective light and Phoenix song. I think only Harry is able to make that happen). OOTP is the only time Harry doesn't save himself, and this is after Voldemort has his blood. I don't know about the Vernon incident, though. Was he really trying to kill Harry? Maybe Harry thought so, and that's all it takes for the protection to kick in. Harry never really thought Dudley and gang were trying to kill him. Presumably Petunia and Dudley *would* be able to kill Harry if they tried, just as Voldemort was able to possess him in OOTP and Harry couldn't protect himself. He certainly though LV was trying to kill him there and couldn't defend himself. Jen Reese From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Wed Dec 1 15:31:59 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 15:31:59 -0000 Subject: Hogwarts letters Re: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118968 Snow wrote : " Have we all forgotten that Hogwarts has a specific class in Muggle Studies that Hermione got a 320% in? (POA) Hogwarts by offering this class does not appear to dismiss the muggle world or what it may have to offer. Hermione wouldn't have been the only child that took Muggle Studies or the class would have been cancelled for lack of interest." Del replies : Muggle studies is about studying the Muggles, their world and their lifestyle. It's not about studying what Muggle children would study in school (Maths, English and so on). I believe that this class is NOT intended primarily for Muggleborns, because it probably doesn't teach much that Muggleborns wouldn't already know. Hermione got a 320% in it precisely because she already knew most or all of it ! I think this class is only an offer for wizard-born kids to get an idea of what the Muggle World is like. Snow wrote : " Could Hermione or any child from a muggle background survive in the muggle world, I would tend to agree that they could, if they wanted to! None of the muggle background children that we have met have been discouraged from attending Hogwarts and none have considered going home even after the basilisk incident where muggles were the prime target." Del replies : This is *precisely* the heart of my problem : ALL the Muggleborns we see are absolutely delighted to live in the WW, and firmly intend to stay there. This is statistically and psychologically impossible, unless they had a VERY compelling reason to all think the same way. So far, the only reason I've been offered that comes close to being compelling is : because the WW is so great. Well, it doesn't look so great to me, so I'm wondering why it seems to look so great to ALL those kids. My personal idea of that compelling reason is : because things seem easier there. The kids see adults do things magically, without any apparent effort, and of course they like that. They just have to sit at the table, and their dinner appears magically out of nowhere. People can apparently turn anything into anything else. They can make things fly, or other cool things. But as they grow up, the kids realise that things aren't that simple. All those spells have to be learned. Not everybody can have a House-Elf. Not everything can be created out of nowhere, or transformed into something else. They also discover that there's a dark side to the wonder : people can control or impersonate you, potions and hexes can do horrible things to you, magical creatures and people aren't necessarily that cool to work with, some people consider Muggleborns as second-class citizens, and so on. But it's almost too late to change their mind by the time they discover all that. Going back to the Muggle World would imply making huge efforts to hide their magic, and to catch up on all the training they didn't get. Considering that apparent easiness is what got them to enthusiastically jump into the WW, I doubt many of them would even consider making the efforts necessary to live a Muggle life, even if they wanted to. So I stand by what I said before : the Muggleborn kids who go to Hogwarts don't truly expand their world, they just exchange one world for another, and there's almost no going back. Del From stevejjen at earthlink.net Wed Dec 1 15:46:12 2004 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 15:46:12 -0000 Subject: Did Sirius *ever* consider consequences? (was: Trusting characters) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118969 > SSSusan: > I definitely won't argue with you that Sirius was rash & reckless in > general, Carol, but I do believe that he did at times consider > consequences. What about his decision to actually *answer* some of > Harry's questions in chapter 5 of OotP? Haven't lots of us bemoaned > the fact that Harry's been kept too much in the dark? That he had > proven himself capable of handling the truth by his actions in the > previous four years [retrieving the stone, duelling Voldy in the > graveyard, etc.] and yet no one would tell him anything, particularly > any "whys"? Sirius *wanted* to fill Harry in and managed to do a > fair bit of it before being halted. I think this was wise, actually. Jen: Personally, I found Sirius to be pretty helpful to Harry in GOF. It's not like any of the adults were falling over themselves to help Harry get through the Triwazard Tournament. Some people may see Sirius returning to Hogsmeade as rash and reckless, but Harry found it helpful to have an adult around to explain some history to him, and answer a few questions during a very confusing time. Besides, the risk there was mainly to Sirius. What would the Ministry do if Harry were found consorting with Sirius at that point in the story? Nothing. Blame it on the Confundus Charm again and move on. JKR makes a good distinction in OOTP about who Sirius was to Harry and it explains Sirius' behavior for me. He was helpful in situations where he was called on to be more like a brother to Harry, but was less successful when he needed to be a parent figure. Like Susan said, Sirius was the only adult in OOTP (and GOF too) who was willing to talk to Harry as a person and not just a 'kid'. JKR mentions that in interviews frequently, that she doesn't agree with talking down to children or assuming they can't understand complex situations. So, overall Sirius was rash and reckless by adult standards. By Harry's standards he offered him some hope and help at the end of POA & GOF and even through the beginning of OOTP. That's where it ended. Jen From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Wed Dec 1 15:40:11 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 07:40:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Hogwarts letters Re: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041201154011.5745.qmail@web53110.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118970 > > Snow wrote: > > Have we all forgotten that Hogwarts has a specific > class in Muggle > Studies that Hermione got a 320% in? (POA) Hogwarts > by offering this > class does not appear to dismiss the muggle world or > what it may have > to offer. Hermione wouldn't have been the only child > that took Muggle > Studies or the class would have been cancelled for > lack of interest. > Juli: I think the purpose of Muggle Studies is to learn how the Muggles get around without magic, I don't think it teaches them any chores on how to work or live in the muggle world, Hermione could of course go back to the MW, she could work for her parents or something, but the question is: Will she want to? I think all of those Muggle born wizards feel at 'home' in the WW, they found an explanation of why they acted different and their powers, and now that they've learnt how to use these powers they couldn't live without them. Juli __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From azriona at juno.com Wed Dec 1 16:06:11 2004 From: azriona at juno.com (Sharon) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 16:06:11 -0000 Subject: Harry's Protection (was Re: Questions) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118971 > Geoff: > 'When Harry told of Wormtail piercing his arm with the dagger, > however, Sirius let out a vehement exclamation; and Dumbledore stood > up so quickly that Harry started. Dumbledore walked around the desk > and told Harry to stretch out his arm. Harry showed them both the > place where his robes were torn and the cut beneath them. > > "He said my blood would make him stronger than if he'd used someone > else's," Harry told Dumbledore. "He said the protection my - my > mother left in me - he'd have it too. And he was right - he could > touch me without hurting himself, he touched my face." > > For a fleeting instant, Harry thought he saw a gleam of something > like triumph in Dumbledore's eyes. But next second, Harry was sure he > had imagined it for when Dumbledore had returned to his seat behind > the desk, he looked as old and weary as Harry had ever seen him.' > (Thanks, Geoff - I didn't see Valky's post until now.) Hmm. Valky, I'll admit I've wondered about that gleam, but never in conjunction with the protection Dumbledore's spell had offered Harry. It puts an inriguing spin on it, to imagine that Dumbledore's magic is now within Voldy. Boy, wouldn't Voldy do a total blood transfusion out of annoyance if he knew? --azriona From azriona at juno.com Wed Dec 1 16:22:33 2004 From: azriona at juno.com (Sharon) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 16:22:33 -0000 Subject: Did Snape work for Dumbledore from Day One? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118972 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Barry Arrowsmith wrote: > Good post. > I do love devious thinking. > *bounces* > Kneasy: Is it that [Snape] wanted revenge on 'Gryffindor' > types - "birds of a feather" sort of thing; on James and Sirius *as > individuals* no matter who or what they were affiliated with; or > against a member(s) of a boodline (the Blacks and maybe the Potters - > who let's face it are a total enigma as a family) that was notorious > for it's anti-social attitudes and patronising indifference to others - > "a pox on all your tribe". Yes, but had Snape wanted revenge on Sirius and James - why was it *Remus* he was following into the Willow? Did he think that by discovering Remus' secret, he would be able to use that agaisnt Sirius and James somehow? For that matter - if Sirius had shown Snape nothing but hatred for the previous 5/6 years - why on *earth* did he believe the boy enough to follow Remus to the Shack? And not expect some sort of trap? (Although maybe he did. Whatever he is, Snape isn't stupid.) > Kneasy: > Damn. Once again we're reduced to saying "if we knew what happened > then, we'd have a better chance of deducing what's going on here." > Mustn't complain though, just think how boring it would be if > everything was open and above board. Sure. No more conspiracy theories. > Kneasy: > Still, thanks for providing food for thought. > Need to ponder, to brood on consequences and ramifications if you're > right. > That's no hardship. Yup. One-stop thought-provoking shop am I. If you want, next week I can provide arguments as to why Winky is really Mrs Crouch in Polyjuice form. --azriona From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Wed Dec 1 15:49:58 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 07:49:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041201154958.84245.qmail@web53101.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118973 snow wrote: > (4)Why does it appear that Harry is protected from > everyone while > living with the Dursley's except Dudley? Why can > Dudley use Harry as > a punching bag but Vernon received a shock when he > touches Harry? > Voldemort, in the graveyard, claims that he is so > protected at the > Dursley's that not even he can touch him there, but > Dudley can. > Maybe it's because they share their mothers' blood, Harry's protection is in Lily's blood, a blood Petunia also has and therefore Dudley, Vernon on the other hand doesn't have this blood, so he can't harm Harry, well, at least not physically. > (5)Neville's father was an auror and both of > Neville's parents were > in the Order but what was Neville's mother's > occupation, something > Gran didn't approve possibly like the Department of > Mysteries where > one of Harry's parents worked perhaps? There were > quite a few spies > for Voldemort on the inside of the Ministry. How > else would Voldemort > have known who was pregnant or who just had a baby? > (Not front-page > news stories) > I think both of Neville parents were Aurors, DD mentions it he says something like this "Frank and Alice Longbottoms were aurors, they were captured after LV fell, when everyone felt safe". Juli From Vivamus at TaprootTech.com Wed Dec 1 16:36:03 2004 From: Vivamus at TaprootTech.com (Vivamus) Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 11:36:03 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] ghosts, magicians and babies was Re: Questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200412011137211.SM01064@devbox> No: HPFGUIDX 118974 > Potioncat: > But we don't know what brave things he faced prior to death. > And we've seen Neville who is very frightened fit well in > Gryffindor. Vivamus: Being frightened has nothing to do with courage. Only a fool is never afraid. Courage is doing what you are afraid of doing because you must. My impression of Neville is that he is shaken by what happened to his parents, and he has very little confidence in himself, but he has as much courage as anyone. Think about a small, pudgy boy, for the sake of honor, climbing over the back of his chair to start a fight with the likes of Crabbe and Goyle. He may have started out inept and forgetful, but I don't think he is either one, any more -- just lacking in confidence. At any rate, he showed his true Gryffindor heart when he took on Crabbe and Goyle by himself. In fact, remember that he won the final points for Gryffindor that earned the House Cup in PS/SS, because of his courage in facing his friends. I don't think that was merely a kindness. I think DD was also showing Neville that he does, in fact, have a great deal of courage, because Neville is *important*. (In fact, I'll go even farther and say that I think that Neville is by far the best candidate I've seen in the books for the HBP, even though he is a pure blood wizard. This has probably been talked about at great length already, but I can go into the reasons why I think it might be the case, if not.) Peter Pettigrew in Gryffindor remains the puzzle for me. We also don't know why, exactly, the Sorting Hat puts students in different houses. Do they go to Gryffindor because they ARE brave, or because they WANT to be brave? The SH put Harry in Gryffindor because that was Harry's choice. What if it is always the boy or girl's choice? Slytherin is the path to power/wealth/easy victory, so it can be just as appealing as the other houses in terms of what the child wants. If PP wanted to be brave more than anything, perhaps he would be chosen for Gryffindor even though his personal moral character just wasn't up to it. I am hoping we'll find out more about the sorting and the houses in the next couple of books. > Potioncat: > A bigger question I think is why the Fat Friar, of all > people, would be afraid to go on to the Hereafter. Vivamus: Think about it this way. If you were a member of a religious order that believed there was eternal punishment for those that did not fulfill the larger requirements of the hereafter, and a very long but temporary punishment for those that fulfilled the larger requirements but had neglected the required disciplines of daily living, and you had spent a lifetime indulging rather than abstaining, wouldn't you be hesitant? My grandmother, when she was near death, used to speak very irritably about the people in her nursing home who had been stalwart members of the church their entire lives, but were terrified of death. It's one thing to say you are not afraid to die because you believe in the afterlife; it is quite another to say it fearlessly when death is staring you in the face. Vivamus From R.Vink2 at chello.nl Wed Dec 1 17:08:19 2004 From: R.Vink2 at chello.nl (Renee) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 17:08:19 -0000 Subject: Slytherin (was Re: Problem with OotP?) In-Reply-To: <20041130215534.92172.qmail@web53103.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118975 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Juli wrote: > >> I don't think just because someone is Slytherin he/she > is evil, there are good Slytherins, like Snape (I just > love him), and Phineas Nigellus. Renee: Was Phineas Nigellus reallyu a `good Slytherin'? He's called the worst Headmaster of Hogwarts ever. Isn't he (or his portrait) honour- bound to help the present Headmaster? What would he do if he wasn't? Renee From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Wed Dec 1 18:23:51 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 10:23:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Slytherin (was Re: Problem with OotP?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041201182351.45114.qmail@web53106.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118976 > Renee: > Was Phineas Nigellus reallyu a `good Slytherin'? He's called the > worst Headmaster of Hogwarts ever. Isn't he (or his portrait) > honour- > bound to help the present Headmaster? What would he do if he > wasn't? Actually, Phineas was the "least popular" Headmaster ever, not the "worst". There is a distinction. Popularity isn't everything. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today! http://my.yahoo.com From finwitch at yahoo.com Wed Dec 1 18:46:50 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 18:46:50 -0000 Subject: Harry's Protection (was Re: Questions) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118977 > azriona: > > I think the only thing that might be considered questionable on > this count is just afterwards, when Crouch!Moody is "half pulling, > half carrying him" back to his office (Chp 35, pg 673 US version). > Crouch!Moody certainly intends to kill Harry, yet he seems to have a > good enough grip that he doesn't let go of Harry until they've > reached their destination. > > > > Valky: > Well with this in mind I am willing to carry on the investigation > under a presumption that harry needs to *conciously* perceive the > threat for the magic to invoke. Finwitch: If that holds true -- I fear that Harry is NOT protected at Dursleys. You never know when Petunia knocks him unconsious with a frying pan and Vernon strangles him? Ans as it is, I think Dumbledore's 'protection' is faulty per se, as well. As Dumbledore put it (As I remember it): As long as Harry can call his home the place where his mother's blood dwells he's safe there - - >From this I figure that the protection spell has 3 limits/conditions: 1) It's in force only where Petunia lives. (4 Privet Drive, possibly also the hotel and the hut on the rock while the Dursleys were there.) Therefore, Fake!Moody had no trouble carrying him with intent to kill. 2) It requires both Petunia's and Harry's living presence. 3) It's in force when Harry can consider the place(1) a home. However, point 3 is faulty. I mean, since when was Harry able to consider 4 Privet Drive his *home*? After all, he spent 10 years wishing for some unknown relative to come and take him away, and afterwards, *Hogwarts* was more a home to him, in book#2 he sees his room as a prison cell(a dream showing his emotions literally), Sirius offered him a home in book #3... IS it enough that Petunia lets Harry to stay and Harry stays? How important is the word *home* in this? Perhaps, if Harry puts his feeling - that 4 Privet Drive is NOT his home and never was - into words, that alone breaks the protection spell. (Then again, CAN may be required as well). Finwitch From finwitch at yahoo.com Wed Dec 1 19:39:44 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 19:39:44 -0000 Subject: Hogwarts letters Re: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: <20041201015902.33632.qmail@web53105.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118978 Juli : > > I agree with Del, muggle born wizards don't have > anything to do in the Muggle World, what kind of job > could they get? an accountant, an architect, what? Finwitch: I know what they could be: Magicians. You know, the sort that *trick* people with pseudo-magic. (Or that's what Muggles would believe, anyway). It would take great deal of practice, yes. But well - You know that trick they do with magician/assistant changing places when all tied up? Polyjuice would be great help. A knife that can undo any knot for other 'getting off chains'-show... And for the rest, well... A chemist? (not so different from Potions or Alchemy, actually Chemistry developed from Alchemy). An astronomer? (They DO teach astronomy at Hogwarts!) 'Pseudo'-meedio, with the help of Divination? And nothing to keep you from writing fantasy stories about WW, is there? Finwitch From boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com Wed Dec 1 20:03:51 2004 From: boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com (Smythe, Boyd T {FLNA}) Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 14:03:51 -0600 Subject: Character Arcs (was: Trusting characters) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118979 Kneasy wrote: >Major characters: >DD - sneaky, devious as hell, manipulative, but a goody >Moody, Molly, Arthur, Ron, Hermione - unless someone sneaky offers to free the Elves in return for a small favour >Neville, MM, Hagrid, Snape - yes, he can be trusted 100%, Lupin - 90% sure, Peter - 50/50 at the moment >Those I don't trust: >Harry - he's got a bit of Voldy in his head >Sirius, Bagman, Fudge, Lockhart >Lucius Malfoy is a special case - he can't be trusted to stay evil. >The other baddies can be trusted to stay bad, I think. >Although I've given a list, that doesn't mean that I won't offer theories or suppositions that may appear to conflict with it. Theorising is what I do - I don't necessarily believe any theory I post; never have done, and I've said so before. So I'll keep on churning out ideas shocking or mundane just for the fun of it. Be prepared.< < boyd: Honestly, the trustworthy, non-trustworthy discussions are driving me batty! First off, I think most of us agree that we don't know what we don't know in this series--Jo has kept us guessing from the beginning, and she likely has some surprises yet to spring on us. The fun is in the guessing, since she sometimes leaves us a few clues. But we have far more clues about most characters' basic character (sorry) than about possible ESEs. So why keep guessing at ESE? Why not look at characters as Jo has since GoF? She has been blurring the lines between good and bad to make it clear that most people are neither good nor evil, they are all simply flawed individuals making flawed choices--except perhaps for LV so far. So must she stoop to having any of the good guys turn out to be ESE, just so Harry can be betrayed? Not necessary. She'll just continue to use their flaws against them, as she did with Sirius and constantly does with Snape (IMO). In fact, she need not even depend on those flaws, for we all hold some things *dearer* than others. As she says through DD, it's about choices. That's the way of the real world, after all; priorities collide and we have to make difficult choices. The good news is that by looking at their character arcs, we can see interesting things about how they may do something significant to help or hurt Harry. Using Kneasy's list.... *DD would sacrifice Harry to rid the world of LV and/or other great WW evils. Need we even discuss this? But add that DD would sacrifice himself to do the same, and Jo will have him prove it in HBP. How could she ask Harry to sacrifice himself for the cause if DD hasn't done it himself? *Moody's character flaw is his paranoia, so he may miscalculate and place Harry at risk needlessly. Likely? Don't think so, since it wouldn't forward the plot or her themes any more than having DD sacrifice himself and Harry. *Molly would likely hand over Harry on a platter in return for the safety of any of her children. Doesn't make her evil, just a loving mother asked to make a horrid choice. Is this possibility likely? We've certainly been set up for it by the boggart scene in OoP, so yes. Not sure how this will play out, but Jo has set poor Molly on a course for heartbreak. Hopefully, the sacrificed Weasley will only be Percy. But.... *Arthur might be more likely to choose Harry over his own children if it means defeating LV. I think he's likely to be the foil to Molly, by in effect preventing her from sacrificing Harry, or by saving his child by sacrificing himself. Also, Arthur loves muggles despite his shockingly poor understanding of them, so perhaps he'll unwittingly endanger Harry through misuse of muggle technology. That last seems a reach, though, and doesn't resonate thematically. *Ron and Hermione are the only other characters that are presented as willing to die on Harry's behalf. They follow him through peril after peril, they understand the end goal (defeat LV) and they are his closest friends. Neither will likely betray him unless tricked into doing so--they are still young and dupe-able, after all. And I think Hermione'd pick Harry over liberation of house-elves. And why would Jo write that such great friends can't be trusted? Unless you believe that the Marauders (incl. Peter) were as close as our new Trio (which I don't). *Neville's weakness is in his background, namely his parents at St. Mungo's. If forced to choose between saving/curing them and helping Harry, he'd probably cling to his parents; I couldn't blame him. Yet while he does not know the stakes of this game (or his role in the prophecy), he did stand tall in the MoM fight scene (so he's braver and more powerful than we saw him earlier in the series), and he has that whole underdog thing going. So I think it most likely that Jo has him on a course with a heroic destiny; no betrayals, just a vital act in support of Harry. *MM has been as purely good as anyone so far, and I expect that to continue. However, we were introduced to her way back in SS/PS as the one worrying about poor baby Harry living with those awful muggles, while DD said it was for the best. If faced with the fact that Harry must sacrifice himself to kill LV, would she be strong enough to let Harry do it, or would she try to intervene on his behalf? Hmmm, tough call, but I doubt we'll see her screw things up like that. More likely, someone will persuade her to let Harry do the noble thing, since it is his own choice; perhaps knowing that DD dies for the same cause will defuse her internal battle. *Hagrid is a true friend to Harry, but he's a bit daft. He sees no danger in Grawp or any of his other projects. So he will likely put Harry at risk--again. And given the escalating dangers of these monsters, what will be next? OTOH, this will likely be one of those dangers that moves the plot along mid-book, not part of the endgame. Or will one of his projects end up saving Harry during the endgame? ("And Grawp strode in scattering DEs like straw, allowing Harry to escape certain death only to come face to face with LV himself..." or something like that.) Would give those plot threads a nice meaning, and mesh well with her theme of good deeds leading to good outcomes (at least for Harry). *Lupin is a werewolf, but that little character flaw has already put Harry in danger in the endgame of one book, so I think we're done with that. My feeling is that when in human form, he is a truly good guy who'll help DD/Harry in whatever way they want in the endgame. Seems to fit her theme of not judging a book by its cover. And I'm not sure how much we'll see of Lupin in the final two books anyway. He's not necessary to the plot anymore unless Jo weaves him back in somehow. *Snape. Oh, good Lord. Let's just skip him. Except to say that Harry still judges *that* book by its cover, a fact that will have to change at some point. *Peter may be a spy, or a double-agent, or maybe he's on double-secret DE probation, I dunno. But I do know that JKR has hit us on the head with the fact that he will somehow help Harry in the end. I lean toward him staying bad and helping Harry unintentionally (the life debt working like bad karma), but many differ. We'll just have to wait and see. *Harry has betrayed himself in the past with his hot-headedness, and this will likely continue--the plot demands it at least one more time (HBP) before the final showdown. Plus, JKR likes Harry *choosing* to be a hero and thereby getting into trouble (Tri-Wizard Tournament excepted, one thing that bothered me about GoF). *Sirius is dead. She has said so, and I believe it. We may learn more about him, but the only way he could be used against Harry is if someone pretends Sirius is still alive or a ghost or reachable via the mirror. Likely? Yes, since I see no other way for information about him to be important in the last 2 books. I think it'll be the last choice (mirror), since herself has said that will still be useful. But it won't be Sirius. Perhaps metamorph Tonks impersonating him? *Bagman/Mundungus are too unknown, but might give up Harry just to turn a quick profit. But neither has been or will be a central character, IMO. *Fudge. The ultimate cipher. He's been in every book. He's the Minister of Magic, for goodness (badness?) sake. But we know so little of his intentions. Evil or incompetent? A political opportunist or a discreetly evil insider? That kind of vagueness took work for Jo to write. Smells like the ultimate setup for a bait and switch by herself at our expense. While we're all reading HBP or #7, if we start to think we know Fudge intentions, we better assume he'll turn out to do the opposite. But right now, it's anybody's guess whether he'll turn out to help or hurt Harry. Mine is that he'll align with LV as soon as he thinks LV will win. *Lockhart was mildly amusing, but now that Harry knows his true character, he's uninteresting. I think we've seen the last of his hijinx. *Lucius is a DE (and Draco is a DE in training), but the question remains whether either will do something to help or hurt Harry, perhaps unintentionally. I'll leave this lot to a Malfoy-ophile. So what does it all mean? Well, instead of worrying about whether Lupin will turn out to be ESE, if we look at possible betrayal scenarios like this, we read the other clues that JKR left for us. No one else need be ESE. They just have to follow their established character arcs for us to see their futures, and perhaps Harry's. This is why I think a Weasley will die, both Fudge and Neville will play significant roles, and the friendship with Hagrid's beasts will be important. Oh, and DD will die in HBP (sorry!), whereupon Harry will have to depend on Snape, whom he will finally see as a good (but flawed) guy. Does that advance things any? --boyd If you want to read the best stuff, go to the FAQ and other links in Files and Links--a treasure trove! From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Wed Dec 1 20:14:12 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 20:14:12 -0000 Subject: Harry's Protection (was Re: Questions) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118980 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "finwitch" wrote: > > If that holds true -- I fear that Harry is NOT protected at Dursleys. > You never know when Petunia knocks him unconsious with a frying pan > and Vernon strangles him? > > Ans as it is, I think Dumbledore's 'protection' is faulty per se, as > well. > > As Dumbledore put it (As I remember it): > As long as Harry can call his home the place where his mother's blood > dwells he's safe there - - > Yeah, but safe from what? It'd be a bit of an anticlimax if Harry was proofed against absolutely every kind of spell, assault and accident. Where's the tension in an impervious hero? Even Superman had his Achilles heel. I posted (a few months back) that the 'Ancient Magic' that protects Harry is only effective against Voldemort and even then it was Voldy's *person* but not his spells. I wouldn't be surprised if the 'blood protection' is/was not as comprehensive as some would think or wish. Wandless magic seemed to protect him when he was at his previous school and I'm willing to accept that it was the same automatic magic that kept him out of Vernon's grasping fists. At a rough guess I'd be willing to bet that 'wandless magic' is a wizard's (or wizard child's) protection against unwelcome Muggle attentions or possible damage from non-magical events, such as Neville being dropped out of a window. Certainly I can't ever remember it being reported as functioning reliably against magic or other wizards. Now if these other types of magic (Ancient, wandless) provide a measure of protection against *specific* types of threat against Harry, then the next question is - "What does blood protection guard him against?" closely followed by another question - "If it protects Harry, why is DD seemingly so pleased that Voldy has Harry's blood in him?" Back to the old "Dumbledore's gleam". IIRC no-one ever has explained that satisfactorily. And I'm not even going to try. Kneasy From foxmoth at qnet.com Wed Dec 1 20:15:14 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 20:15:14 -0000 Subject: Did Sirius *ever* consider consequences? (was: Trusting characters) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118981 > > SSSusan: > I definitely won't argue with you that Sirius was rash & reckless in general, Carol, but I do believe that he did at times consider consequences. What about his decision to actually *answer* some of Harry's questions in chapter 5 of OotP? < Pippin: It was a good decision, but did Sirius get there by considering the consequences? I thought he was more concerned with assering Harry's rights, and his own rights as godfather. It seems to me Sirius never liked thinking about what could go wrong or what would happen once his goal was achieved.But in this case, it was considering the consequences that had led Dumbledore and Molly astray. Molly, as we saw in the boggart episode, was unable to shift her thoughts away from what might go wrong. Dumbledore's thinking is nothing if not long-range. In OOP it was *too* long-range; he wasn't able to alter his plans or his thinking to take account of the circumstances he did not foresee. Pippin From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 1 20:22:50 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 20:22:50 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118982 Carol earlier: > > And there's no indication that anything terrible has yet happened in his [James'] young life to stir him up and start him thinking about serious issues like VW1. > > SSSusan: > This is true--we've no backstory for James' early life yet. OTOH, we do know that Sirius wanted to escape his pureblood, DA-leaning > family, and where did he choose to go? To James' family. *Maybe* > that was because James was his best buddy by then. Or *maybe* it was that James and his family were *known* to Sirius to offer up a home where the Dark Arts were detested. > > Because we can't know this one way or the other, I just don't see any > reason to believe that Sirius was misremembering. Yeah, James was an > ass here. But maybe he was just an ass. A truly DA-hating ass. I > don't see any compelling reason to not read the scene this way. Carol responds: And I don't see any compelling reason to view the fun-loving, thoughtless, egotistical James as holding any serious convictions at this point. No doubt he took his parents' teachings for granted, and no doubt Severus did the same, but I can see no evidence that their running conflict is anything but personal. "Because he exists" is not an indication that James opposes the Dark Arts or anything else about Severus's philosophy. It's Severus as a *person* that he seems to dislike. It's *Sirius* who clearly has an anti-Dark Arts bias based on his hatred of his home life. James shows no such *active* and *vehement* aversion to the Dark Arts per se. There's nothing serious in his attitude until the "Mudblood" remark, and again, the reaction is personal; Severus has insulted Lily, using what James has been taught is a bad word. I'm sure he would have reacted in exactly the same way if Severus had called Lily a b**ch. And again, although Nora has postulated a connection between pureblood elitism and the Dark Arts, we don't have any proof that those two ideas are connected in *James's* mind though I grant that they're connected in *Sirius's* because of the emphasis on both Dark magic and genealogy at 12 Grimmauld Place. So again I think that Sirius may be projecting *his* values onto James or at least exaggerating the extent of James's opposition to the Dark Arts, etc., in the Pensieve scene. Surely you don't think he's bullying Severus *on principle*? Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 1 20:30:43 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 20:30:43 -0000 Subject: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118983 > Nora wrote : > " My point with bringing up the possibility of return into Muggle > society at some level is that Muggleborns don't necessarily have to > give up absolutely everything. Some dreams can be transmuted (doctor into Healer, for example), and some can be pursued alongside a > magical education, such as artistic interests." > > Del replied : > Without a teacher ? I doubt it. > And what about sports ? There's absolutely no mention of any Muggle > sport being practiced at Hogwarts. Dean's football poster is the only mention of any Muggle sport (and Ron mocks him for it, which I doubt he would do if there was such a thing as a football club at Hogwarts). > > It really looks as if a Muggleborn just has to leave his Muggle past > behind when he goes to Hogwarts. From the time he gets to Hogwarts on, he is a wizard only. Well, except for the purebloods of course, who seem to be the only ones to acknowledge that the Muggleborns come from the Muggle world. Carol adds: I think Del is right. Imagine a Muggleborn trying to enter a Muggle college or university based on a transcript from Hogwarts! Carol From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 1 20:35:55 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 20:35:55 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118984 > Carol responds: "Because he exists" is not an indication that James opposes the Dark Arts or anything else about Severus's philosophy. It's Severus as a *person* that he seems to dislike. Alla: Don't you think that it CAN be read as an indication that James opposes Dark Arts? Only because we don't know the backstory yet, don't you think that ther is at least a TINY possibility that "because he exists" contains more than just casual dismissal of his victim by the bully. Carol: It's *Sirius* who clearly has an anti-Dark Arts bias based on his hatred of his home life. James shows no such *active* and *vehement* aversion to the Dark Arts per se. There's nothing serious in his attitude until the "Mudblood" remark, and again, the reaction is personal; Severus has insulted Lily, using what James has been taught is a bad word. I'm sure he would have reacted in exactly the same way if Severus had called Lily a b**ch. And again, although Nora has postulated a connection between pureblood elitism and the Dark Arts,we don't have any proof that those two ideas are connected in *James's* mind though I grant that they're connected in *Sirius's* because of the emphasis on both Dark magic and genealogy at 12 Grimmauld Place. So again I think that Sirius may be projecting *his* > values onto James or at least exaggerating the extent of James's > opposition to the Dark Arts, etc., in the Pensieve scene. Alla: I think it is VERY likely that James was the one who helped Sirius to see the Light, so to speak. I think it is VERY likely that James was the one who helped Sirius to realise that it is OK to be in gryffindor, even if his family consisted of Slytherins. I think it is VERY likely that James was the one who projected his values to Sirius and helped him to stregthen his convictions against the Dark Arts. The fact that Sirius runs to James' home and stays there is quite a strong hint for me that James' family disliked Dark Arts. Carol: > Surely you don't think he's bullying Severus *on principle*? Alla: No, but I think that James' principles were partially the reason for the bullying. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 1 20:41:40 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 20:41:40 -0000 Subject: Did Sirius *ever* consider consequences? (was: Trusting characters) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118985 > Pippin: It was a good decision, but did Sirius get there by considering the consequences? I thought he was more concerned with assering Harry's rights, and his own rights as godfather. It seems to me Sirius never liked thinking about what could go wrong or what would happen once his goal was achieved.But in this case, it was considering the consequences that had led Dumbledore and Molly astray. Alla: Oh, I don't know, Pippin. I wish we could have been in Sirius' head at least for a while. Him being rash often - true. Him being very smart is also true. So, maybe in this case he indeed considered the consequences for Harry, which he as Godfather was supposed to do? Sirius, unlike Dumbledore, came to the correct conclusion - Harry needed to know what is going on. From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Dec 1 20:48:00 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 20:48:00 -0000 Subject: Hogwarts letters Re: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118986 Juli : > > I agree with Del, muggle born wizards don't have > > anything to do in the Muggle World, what kind of job > > could they get? an accountant, an architect, what? Finwitch: > I know what they could be: Magicians. > And for the rest, well... A chemist? (not so different from Potions > or Alchemy, actually Chemistry developed from Alchemy). > An astronomer? (They DO teach astronomy at Hogwarts!) > 'Pseudo'-meedio, with the help of Divination? > And nothing to keep you from writing fantasy stories about WW, is > there? SSSusan: It seems to me there are many options: run a business practice law [though providing a school transcript in order to get into law school could be tricky...] establish a manufacturing plant or just work in one be a carpenter or other manual laborer be an ice cream man [Rupert Grint's personal favorite :-)] farm work in sales or customer service teach do research for a drug company run a post office which surreptitiously provides WW mail service, too be a clerical worker To me the list is endless. It all hinges upon being willing to not use your magic -- which I *do* think is possible, especially for adult witch/wizards -- or to mask it or to work solo or even to work with other magical "Muggles" so that you use magic behind closed doors. If the witch/wizard has decided to return to the Muggle World, one can assume a willingness to leave the magic behind or to hide it. There are a lot of Muggle occupations which don't require advanced degrees, and for those which do, since Muggles also have to continue their educations anyway, it wouldn't be weird for someone their age to be continuing on. The hardest part would be producing that transcript.... Siriusly Snapey Susan From kreneeb at hotmail.com Wed Dec 1 20:48:17 2004 From: kreneeb at hotmail.com (hermionekitten9) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 20:48:17 -0000 Subject: "The Great Humberto" was: Questions Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118987 Snow: > (2)If the Dursley's are so against anything having to do with magic, why was Dudley allowed to watch a magician on television? SS The Letters From No One: Dudley whining to his mother "It's Monday... The Great Humberto's on tonight. I want to stay somewhere with a television." I may be wrong to think that the Great Humberto is a magician but it sounds awfully similar to the Great Houdini. Also it sounds as though this were a regiment of Dudley's weekly routine. I realize that the Dursley's are more than permissive when it comes to Dudley but when it comes to the dirty "M" word and the possibility that Harry might be influenced if he were to see the magician program, why was Dudley allowed to watch it? (It is the small somewhat insignificant details I tend to question) kitten: I remember not too long ago on this list, this was discussed... it was mentioned by someone that "The Great Humberto" might have been a nickname for a wrestler (or maybe even a boxer)... "The Rock" "Stone Cold Steve Austin" "Andre the Giant" "Hulk Hogan" ect. ect. ect. And not a magician I really liked this idea, because it fits with Dudley's aggressive cough*bullying*cough temperament, Dudley would be upset if he couldn't watch people fight on television.-g- kitten... who does like Dudley for some unknown reason... and is disapointed that he is as he seems. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 1 20:59:00 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 20:59:00 -0000 Subject: Knowing it was Snape (was: What has Snape seen) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118988 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > > SSSusan: > (snip) > > I admit that I assumed the teenage boy to be Snape, but I know some > > have wondered whether that is true, as well as whether the hook- > > nosed man is Snape or perhaps Snape's father, with the cowering boy > > being Snape. I would argue that we cannot be certain of any of it > > because it's all based upon Harry's perception, and we've been > > shown before that the narrator has "allowed" Harry's perception to > > be presented as fact previously, only to have it eventually be > > shown to be a misperception. > > > > For another example, just think of GoF, when Harry is preparing to > > enter the Yule Ball with the other champions & their dates. The > > narrator says that Harry saw Viktor Krum with a pretty girl whom he > > did not know. But of course he DID know her! It was Hermione; > > Harry simply did not recognize her. Yet the narrator says it was a > > girl Harry "did not know", not that Harry didn't think he knew her > > or that he didn't recognize her. Surely this would be a case where > > Harry "should" have known one of his two best friends, but he did > > not. > > > > Likely or not in this case of the teenaged boy & the hook-nosed man, > > there is at least precedent for Harry's pronouncements of > > recognition to be faulty. > > Nadine : > > Your example taken from GoF illustrates your point very well, Susan, > > and I agree with you. Harry's perceptions are deceiving sometimes > > but in the OotP scene (Chapter 26 - Seen and Unforeseen) the > > narrator says: ?Harry did not speak; he felt that to say anything > > might be dangerous. He was sure he had just broken into Snape's > > memories, that he had just seen scenes from Snape's childhood. It > > was unnerving to think that the little boy who had been crying as > > he watched his parents shouting was actually standing in front of > > him with such loathing in his eyes?. Apparently, Harry > > just ?identified? little Snape and his shouting parents... Truth or > > deception ? > > > SSSusan: > Nadine, I think they're actually similar(?). I'm away from GoF right > now, but I believe it was the same kind of set-up. Harry wasn't > speaking in the Yule Ball scene either; it was the narrator reporting > that Harry saw Krum and a girl he didn't know. Just as the narrator > here [and thanks for the quote!] says Harry was unnerved that this > was the little boy he'd seen now standing there. It seems to read > the same way to me. > > Hmmmm. Then again, "It was unnerving to *think* that the little boy > he had just seen...was actually standing in front of him" [emphasis > added] actually makes it look a little MORE suspect than I'd > imagined.... This sends up a red flag kinda like "assume" and "as > if" in JKR's world. Or am I missing something obvious? Is there a > clear difference between the presentation of the two bits of > narration from GoF and OotP? Somebody please let me know if so! > > > Siriusly Snapey Susan, who wasn't a lit major and sometimes feels it > here! Carol (who was a lit major, if it matters here) responds: The difference is that we're looking at Snape's memories, not the student body of Hogwarts. He has to be present in all of them. Ergo, the lonely teenager zapping flies has to be Severus, as does the boy on the bucking broom. Harry is therefore most likely right in also identifying the small crying boy rather than the hook-nosed man as snape. He knows very well what the adult Snape looks like and he knows whose memories he's viewing. I admit that the narrator is sometimes unreliable (the Hermione example is a good one), but we've sometimes doubted information that turned out to be correct. Remember Harry's memory of the Gryffindor Quidditch player (James) sitting under the same tree as Ron and rumpling {wrong verb, I know} his hair? People argued that Harry was just assuming that his father was in Gryffindor, but JKR has told us he was right. He's probably right in this instance, too. Who else would the teenage boy and the broom riding boy be but Snape? And if he's Snape, why wouldn't the little boy be as well? We certainly have no indication that Snape was ever married and a father. And how could he have been in the limited amount of time we have between leaving Hogwarts and returning four years later as a teacher--meantime joining the DEs and leaving them to become a spy. If the death of his child and wife (whom the hook-nosed man doesn't seem to love much) were the trigger that caused Snape to leave the DEs, the little boy could have been no more than two, and the hook-nosed man a 21-year-old Snape. There's no indication that either the boy or the man is that young. And anyway, if Harry can recognize Snape at fifteen (here and in the later Pensieve scene), he can recognize him at 21 or older. Notice, too, that Harry finds out his mistake about Hermione immediately. There's no such correction of the Snape memories, which are almost certainly intended to give us some insight into Snape's childhood and some degree of sympathy for him in preparation for the later Pensieve scene. Foreshadowing, in a way. Carol, who should be editing a mediocre crime novel instead of catching up on posting From hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk Wed Dec 1 20:58:30 2004 From: hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk (Hannah) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 20:58:30 -0000 Subject: Slytherin House again. Was: Re: Problem with OotP? (was: Pampering) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118989 Kim chiming in: > I hadn't even noticed this aspect of Dumbledore's Army. It seems a > shame to me too, but also not surprising that no Slytherins joined. > I think that JKR may want to set the Slytherins as an example of > people who are *potentially* interested in benefiting the common > good, but are too caught up in their own ambitions to get involved. > That's why they're in Slytherin in the first place, isn't it? But I > think it's necessary to show all walks of WW society, even in a > school setting, as Jeanette says. "It takes all kinds to make a > world" can sometimes be a sad but true statement. It seems to me > too that another purpose of Slytherin House is to show the remaining > three houses the *wrong* way to behave, and the other three houses > are there to show the Slytherins the *right* ways to behave, in a > sense. Although I suppose there are good things to be said for > Slytherin-style ambition, it, like other double-edged character > traits, is dangerous if it's not tempered by more positive traits. > > Just wondering: Are there any non-pureblood Slytherins? Harry had > his chance to be in Slytherin, and he's not a pureblood, but maybe he > had a chance only because he *was* Harry (i.e. the boy who lived). I > can't think of any others (except Tom Riddle, of course). Anyway, a > non-pureblood Slytherin would be in for a pretty rough time from most > of his/her fellow Slytherins, so it would seem. Hannah: JKR has hinted (as only she can) that maybe Snape isn't pureblood. She says (in a webchat somewhere) that he's not a muggleborn, but she deliberately doesn't say he's pureblooded. So I'm guessing he's half blood. But other than Malfoy, we don't really know much about the backgrounds of any of the other Slytherins, except that a disproportionate number have DE fathers. Goyle could be half troll for all we know (joking here!) I think there must be some half blooded Slytherins, simply because pure bloods are supposed to be getting rarer, and there are quite a few pure bloods in other houses. I think it's just muggle-borns that really wouldn't be able to be sorted into Slytherin. OTOH, I don't see why a muggle born couldn't be sneaky, ambitious, etc. Maybe if they were, they'd still be put into Slytherin. The whole allocation of houses process seems so utterly stupid to me that I'd believe anything of it! No reasoning, however logical, could persuade me that having Slytherin as a way to identify potential dark wizards, or to show the other nice children what nasty children are like, is anything other that utterly reprehensible. These children are 11 years old when they get sorted! The idea of damning a quarter of them at that age to simply serve as an example to others, or to wait out the days till they become a death eater, is horrible. Talk about self- fulfulling prophecies! Hannah From foxmoth at qnet.com Wed Dec 1 21:00:46 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 21:00:46 -0000 Subject: Character Arcs (was: Trusting characters) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118990 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Smythe, Boyd T {FLNA}" wrote: > *Lupin is a werewolf, but that little character flaw has already put Harry in danger in the endgame of one book, so I think we're done with that. My feeling is that when in human form, he is a truly good guy who'll help DD/Harry in whatever way they want in the endgame. Seems to fit her theme of not judging a book by its cover. And I'm not sure how much we'll see of Lupin in the final two books anyway. He's not necessary to the plot anymore unless Jo weaves him back in somehow. > So what does it all mean? Well, instead of worrying about whether Lupin will turn out to be ESE, if we look at possible betrayal scenarios like this, we read the other clues that JKR left for us. No one else need be ESE. They just have to follow their established character arcs for us to see their futures, and perhaps Harry's. This is why I think a Weasley will die, both Fudge and Neville will play significant roles, and the friendship with Hagrid's beasts will be important. Oh, and DD will die in HBP (sorry!),whereupon Harry will have to depend on Snape, whom he will finally see as a good (but flawed) guy. > > Does that advance things any? Pippin: So far none of us have been all that great at guessing what JKR is going to do with her characters,not that it's ever stopped me. I was amused that Kneasy put Pettigrew at 50/50 but Lupin at 90/10 -- surely these two should affect one another? If Pettigrew is going to choose good after all, then another Marauder needs to choose bad. James and Sirius are out of the running, pace Kneasy, as neither of them is available to be fed to the dementors. If Peter escapes, then I'm afraid Lupin is doomed. As you say, if Lupin isn't evil, then JKR has run out of things to do with him, and I don't think she has. That detachment of his has to be trouble. "Indifference and neglect often do much more damage than outright dislike..." said Dumbledore. That has to play out. I've assumed that Lupin would have to hate his former friends to turn against them. But what if he only had to become detached? We've certainly seen lots of examples of that in canon. All those times he speaks "lightly" or "evenly" about things which ought to be very upsetting, we've taken it that he's concealing his feelings. But what if he isn't? What if he's detaching himself? Pippin From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 1 21:07:16 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 21:07:16 -0000 Subject: Hogwarts letters Re: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118991 > SSSusan: It seems to me there are many options: > run a business, practice law [though providing a school transcript in order to get into law school could be tricky...] establish a manufacturing plant or just work in one be a carpenter or other manual laborer be an ice cream man [Rupert Grint's personal favorite :-)] farm work in sales or customer service teach do research for a drug company run a post office which surreptitiously provides WW mail service, too be a clerical worker To me the list is endless. It all hinges upon being willing to not use your magic -- which I *do* think is possible, especially for adult witch/wizards -- or to mask it or to work solo or even to work with other magical "Muggles" so that you use magic behind closed doors. If the witch/wizard has decided to return to the Muggle World, one can assume a willingness to leave the magic behind or to hide it. There are a lot of Muggle occupations which don't require advanced degrees, and for those which do, since Muggles also have to continue their educations anyway, it wouldn't be weird for someone their age to be continuing on. The hardest part would be producing that transcript.... Alla: I absolutely agree. We, as humans, have almost unlimited ability to adapt to new and unknown conditions of life, whether it is coming to new world or returning to the old one after years of absence. I like many of your examples. I can just see Snape doing research for the drug company and trying to patent some of his potions under new names. Hmmmm, I wonder how would he advertise Wolfsbane? :o) Practising law - well, as long as there is no transcript, why not? :) Actually, I don't know that for sure since I was not living in the USA yet back in those days, but someone once told me that decades ago you were not required to even go to law school in order to practice. You only had to pass the Bar exam. If that is true, which I am not sure about, then yeah, hermione can try to become a lawyer, why not? :) From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 1 21:11:55 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 21:11:55 -0000 Subject: Character Arcs (was: Trusting characters) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118992 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > As you say, if Lupin isn't evil, then JKR has run out of things to > do with him, and I don't think she has. That detachment of his > has to be trouble. "Indifference and neglect often do much more > damage than outright dislike..." said Dumbledore. That has to > play out. Alla: If Lupin is not ESE!, then there is no place for development of his character? Why? How about him trying to overcome some of his character flaws and working on that detachment of his? I disagree. I think there is plenty of possibilities to develop Lupin ( in the limits of him being a supporting character of course). From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Wed Dec 1 21:17:03 2004 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 21:17:03 -0000 Subject: ghosts, magicians and babies was Re: Questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118993 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > > Potioncat: > I'm not sure I follow this question. We don't have any clue that I > know of about Alice's occupation, nor whether Gram approved of her. Hickengruendler: Alice was an Auror as well. Moody said so when he showed Harry the photo of the old Order. And later Mrs Longbottom told Harry and the others in the scene on the closed ward, that both her son and her daughter-in-law were Aurors. This sort of contradicts the Pensieve scene in GoF, where it was only said that the Longbottoms were an Auror and his wife, who were attacked by the Death Eaters. There was no mention that Neville's mother was an Auror, too. I think making Alice an Auror as well was an afterthought from JKR, because of the criticism she got for her female characters. But whatever the reason was, it's now canon. She's an Auror. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 1 21:19:30 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 21:19:30 -0000 Subject: Trusting characters Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118994 Siriusly Snapey Susan wrote: > I wonder if your first [amusing :-)] statement [Ever So Stupid Sirius] plays into the final question? That is, maybe Sirius wasn't *thinking* very logically but just reacting. He got worried...he wondered if J/L/H were safe...he rushed off to the place most *likely* for them to have been, forgetting that if all was well, he wouldn't have been able to see them even if they were there because of the Fidelius Charm. > > But as you ask, do we know what breaks the FC? Does it end as soon > as a party being protected is killed? I don't think we know. But if it is broken that way, then it may just be that Sirius "lucked out" > in being able to determine what had happened. > Carol responds: If he'd been told the secret by Peter, and I assume he must have been told or he wouldn't have known where they were, he's have been able to see them and visit them in Godric's Hollow just as Harry can see and enter 12 Grimmauld Place when he's been told *that* secret. It's *possible* that he wasn't told and only knew to go there because the Fidelius Charm was broken, but I think he would have said so when he told the story if that were the case. I do think that DD and Hagrid knew about GH because the charm had been broken, but I don't think that's the case with Sirius. After all, James had wanted Sirius to be the Secret Keeper and it was Sirius's idea to change the SK to Peter. Probably they were all together when the Fidelius Charm was placed on Peter, presumably by Lily, so either Sirius knew because he was there, or James ordered Peter to tell Sirius immediately and Peter was in no position to argue. (No doubt James told Peter *not* to tell Remus, and he readily agreed to that!) Anyway, my point is that if Sirius knew the secret, and I think he did, he would have been able to see the Potters themselves, not just the house. (It's apparently different from the Order HQ Fidelius Charm, where the house itself is hidden. In this case, LV could theoretically have peeked through a window, but the Potters would have been invisible if the secret that they were hidden there had not been revealed.) Carol, hoping this makes sense and apologizing for inadequate snipping on her previous post From R.Vink2 at chello.nl Wed Dec 1 21:20:06 2004 From: R.Vink2 at chello.nl (Renee) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 21:20:06 -0000 Subject: Slytherin (was Re: Problem with OotP?) In-Reply-To: <20041201182351.45114.qmail@web53106.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118995 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Magda Grantwich wrote: > > Renee: > > Was Phineas Nigellus reallyu a `good Slytherin'? He's called the > > worst Headmaster of Hogwarts ever. Isn't he (or his portrait) > > honour- > > bound to help the present Headmaster? What would he do if he > > wasn't? > > > Actually, Phineas was the "least popular" Headmaster ever, not the > "worst". > > There is a distinction. Popularity isn't everything. > >Magda Thanks for correcting me! But I'm not sure which of the two is more damning... Renee From spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com Wed Dec 1 21:24:28 2004 From: spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com (dungrollin) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 21:24:28 -0000 Subject: Hogwarts letters Re: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118996 > Juli : > > > I agree with Del, muggle born wizards don't have > > > anything to do in the Muggle World, what kind of job > > > could they get? an accountant, an architect, what? > > Finwitch: > > I know what they could be: Magicians. > > And for the rest, well... A chemist? (not so different from Potions > > or Alchemy, actually Chemistry developed from Alchemy). > > An astronomer? (They DO teach astronomy at Hogwarts!) > > 'Pseudo'-meedio, with the help of Divination? > > And nothing to keep you from writing fantasy stories about WW, is > > there? > > > SSSusan: > It seems to me there are many options: > run a business > practice law [though providing a school transcript in order to > get into law school could be tricky...] > establish a manufacturing plant or just work in one > be a carpenter or other manual laborer > be an ice cream man [Rupert Grint's personal favorite :-)] > farm > work in sales or customer service > teach > do research for a drug company > run a post office which surreptitiously provides WW mail service, > too > be a clerical worker > > To me the list is endless. It all hinges upon being willing to > not use your magic -- which I *do* think is possible, especially > for adult witch/wizards -- or to mask it or to work solo or even > to work with other magical "Muggles" so that you use magic behind > closed doors. If the witch/wizard has decided to return to the > Muggle World, one can assume a willingness to leave the magic > behind or to hide it. > > There are a lot of Muggle occupations which don't require advanced > degrees, and for those which do, since Muggles also have to > continue their educations anyway, it wouldn't be weird for someone > their age to be continuing on. The hardest part would > be producing that transcript.... > > Siriusly Snapey Susan I agree 100% with SSSusan. Postman, milkman, dustman, salesman, supermarket checkout thingy, shopkeeper, call centre worker, porter, caretaker, bus driver, train driver, hotel receptionist, cleaner, long-haul lorry driver... Not to mention all those jobs that give you training in themselves: policeman, fireman, paramedic, hairdresser, chef, baker, builder, and so on... A Muggle university education may well be out for Hogwarts grads, but come off it! Lacking a university education does not mean you have no place in society! Honestly... Dungrollin From willsonkmom at msn.com Wed Dec 1 21:35:37 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 21:35:37 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118997 > Alla: > > No, but I think that James' principles were partially the reason for > the bullying. Potioncat: Just to clarify, Do you think the principles would justify the bullying? I can think of a lot of people who bully on principle, but they are still bullies. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 1 21:41:20 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 21:41:20 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118998 > > Alla previously: No, but I think that James' principles were partially the reason for the bullying. > Potioncat: > Just to clarify, Do you think the principles would justify the > bullying? I can think of a lot of people who bully on principle, > but they are still bullies. Alla: I think I said it many times. NO, nothing will justify bullying, absolutely nothing, but I also think that it may explain some things, unjustififiable as they are. I see no reason to deny backstory to Marauders. Snape is not the only one, who is allowed to have unknown reasons for doing things, you know. :o) From pbarhug at earthlink.net Wed Dec 1 21:09:11 2004 From: pbarhug at earthlink.net (Pam Hugonnet) Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 16:09:11 -0500 Subject: Remaining behind (was: ghosts, magicians and babies) References: Message-ID: <006401c4d7ea$07795dd0$0301000a@DJZCB631> No: HPFGUIDX 118999 Snow wrote: > > (1)Nearly Headless Nick is the Gryffindor house ghost. snip Isn't bravery and > chivalry equal to fearlessness like when Harry dashes off without a > thought to his own safety? It seems quite odd that Nick was in > Gryffindor when he didn't display such qualities. Potioncat replied: But we don't know what brave things he faced prior to death. And we've seen Neville who is very frightened fit well in Gryffindor. Quite a few of the housemembers sometimes fall short of reaching the ideal qualities of their houses. (Think twins hissing at a new boy because he was sorted into Slytherin.) Perhaps it isn't just fear that leads someone to remain behind as a ghost. Each ghost may likely have very different reasons for not wanting to move on, but I think that each reason may reflect something of the character of the house that the ghost is attatched to as well as the character of the person that he/she once was. I think that it was difficult for Nick to admit that he remained behind out of fear. In some ways he has been forced to live in eternity with the badge of his shame: the official ghost of the house which values bravery because of his lack of courage at the decisive moment. We know nothing definative of Moaning Myrtle's house (I think she was a Syltherin), but we know that her reason for staying behind was revenge--she wanted to punish Olive Hornsby for laughing at her (Myrtle's) glasses. No fear there. As for the Fat Friar, I think his name gives us a clue about why he stayed behind. I think JKR is following the tradition of literary characters like Friar Tuck and the Prioress--servants of God who are very attatched to the pleasures of the flesh. The Fat Friar may not have wanted to leave behind his earthly pleasures and loyalties in favor of unknown spiritual pursuits---speculation only. As for the rest of the ghosts, anyone else care to speculate? drpam who does think that the Bloody Baron was denied the option to move on because of his transgressions in his earthly life, based on the theory that the blood stains on his clothing are unicorn blood. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 1 21:52:06 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 21:52:06 -0000 Subject: Hermione's Time Turner In-Reply-To: <200411291633634.SM01064@devbox> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119000 Vivamus wrote: > I'm pretty sure we haven't seen the end of time travel, though. Remember the Quidditch World Cup? Fred and George bet everything they had on a hundred to one shot, with complete confidence, and no indication of surprise that they had won. Somehow, they *knew.* > Carol responds: I've addressed this before, so apologies to anyone who already knows my views. IMO, it's extremely unlikely that the twins had a time turner. They seem to be rare items and highly regulated. All it took, really, to win that bet was brains and the Twins' usual creative approach to everything. They knew that Krum was the best Seeker in the world, therefore he would catch the Snitch; they also knew that Ireland had the best *team* in the world, therefore they would win the match. Just because the Seeker catching the Snitch usually wins the game doesn't mean that it always does so. The twins figured out that Ireland's Keeper would prevent Bulgaria from scoring many goals and that Ireland would probably get in lots of goals before the Snitch was caught. They also knew that Krum was a merciless player familiar with the Wronski Feint and other diversionary tactics and that he would do everything he could to prevent Ireland's Seeker from scoring. Putting all this together, they reasoned correctly that Ireland would win but Krum would catch the Snitch. Ludo Bagman, being a lot less clever and creative than the Twins, put up big money (Leprechaun's gold, to be sure) against such an unusual outcome, but the Twins were right. No time-turning necessary. They just needed, like Snape on various occasions, to put two and two together. Carol, who thinks the Twins would have been a lot less angry about being cheated if they had cheated themselves From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 1 21:55:35 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 21:55:35 -0000 Subject: Postscript to F and G Time-turning post Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119001 Carol again: I forgot to add that if anyone is interested in responding to Vivamus's ideas on time-turning rather than just the F&G angle, they'll need to go upthread to post 118827, which I snipped mercilessly and hope I haven't killed. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/118827 Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 1 22:12:02 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 22:12:02 -0000 Subject: Another Flint? (Was: When?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119002 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: Juli wrote: > > And talking about flints, has anyone come to an answer of why was the young Creevey brother at the Hog's Head meeting when Hermione told anyone who wanted to form a DADA club to go? The kid was only in his 2nd year. bboyminn (Steve) responded: > > It's easy, Dennis waited in the courtyard, while Fred and George > exited the building heading for the main gate. However, unseen by > Filch, they sneeked around the side of the castle and levitated Dennis over the courtyard wall. > > How do I know...? Easy, I made it up; works every time. > > On a more serious note, if we must have an explanation, as opposed to an absolute flint, the we must surmise some type of trickery. Filch > standing at the front door checking names would never be enough to > stop the likes of Fred and George, or any other moderately ingenious > student. Carol responds: I know you have tongue in cheek here, but seriously, F&G would have no reason to help silly little Dennis Creevey attend the DA meeting. They probably barely know who he is. Either Dennis himself took advantage of his small size to sneak out (maybe he and his brother are smarter than we think and figured out a way, out of sheer devotion to Harry) or JKR simply forgot that he was a second-year, just as she forgot that Marcus Flint was a seventh-year. Remember, she also forgot that some of Colin Creevey's photos had been developed and had to change her answer to that question on her website. I think she's so focused on the big picture that she sometimes forgets small details (unless they're clues or red herrings that she's deliberately planted), especially if those details are in any way connected with math. It's a Flint! Well, I think so, anyway, and will continue to do so even if JKR tries to explain it away on her website. carol From R.Vink2 at chello.nl Wed Dec 1 22:16:09 2004 From: R.Vink2 at chello.nl (Renee) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 22:16:09 -0000 Subject: Character Arcs (was: Trusting characters) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119003 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Smythe, Boyd T > {FLNA}" wrote: > > > *Lupin is a werewolf, but that little character flaw has already > put Harry in danger in the endgame of one book, so I think we're > done with that. My feeling is that when in human form, he is a > truly good guy who'll help DD/Harry in whatever way they want in > the endgame. Seems to fit her theme of not judging a book by its > cover. And I'm not sure how much we'll see of Lupin in the final > two books anyway. He's not necessary to the plot anymore > unless Jo weaves him back in somehow. > > > > So what does it all mean? Well, instead of worrying about > whether Lupin will turn out to be ESE, if we look at possible > betrayal scenarios like this, we read the other clues that JKR left > for us. No one else need be ESE. They just have to follow their > established character arcs for us to see their futures, and > perhaps Harry's. > > Pippin: > > So far none of us have been all that great at guessing what JKR > is going to do with her characters, not that it's ever stopped me. I > was amused that Kneasy put Pettigrew at 50/50 but Lupin at > 90/10 -- surely these two should affect one another? If Pettigrew > is going to choose good after all, then another Marauder needs > to choose bad. > James and Sirius are out of the running, pace > Kneasy, as neither of them is available to be fed to the > dementors. If Peter escapes, then I'm afraid Lupin is doomed. Renee: I fail to see the logic in this. Even if Peter is redeemed in the end - and I actually hope he will be - he still went bad in the first Voldemort war. But more to the point, it's no law that one of the four Marauders has to end up irredeemably evil at the end of the series, or that if another character will be fed to the Dementors, it has to be a remaining Marauder. In a way, all four of them were flawed. - James was arrogant and cocksure, and not just at school (He and Sirius thought they could solve the SK problem between them.) - Sirius was reckless and sometimes vicious - Lupin is a moral coward, afraid to lose people's appreciation - Peter is a sycophant and a turncloak Their friendship didn't survive the first Voldemort War, and I think this is part of the function of the backstory: to show how an apparently tightly woven fabric of friendship can rip apart under strain. It will be very interesting to see how this theme will be handled for the generation of the Trio (or perhaps the Sextet). More interesting, IMO, than looking for another traitor in the previous generation. Pippin: > As you say, if Lupin isn't evil, then JKR has run out of things to do with him, and I don't think she has. That detachment of his > has to be trouble. "Indifference and neglect often do much more > damage than outright dislike..." said Dumbledore. That has to > play out. Renee: Very well possible. Lupin certainly seems capable of messing up things (again) by an act of omission. But JKR could also have him overcome his flaws instead and turn him into a better werewolf. And maybe he'll take over Snape's Occlumency lessons :) Pippin: > I've assumed that Lupin would have to hate his former friends to > turn against them. But what if he only had to become detached? > We've certainly seen lots of examples of that in canon. All those > times he speaks "lightly" or "evenly" about things which ought to > be very upsetting, we've taken it that he's concealing his > feelings. But what if he isn't? What if he's detaching himself? Renee: Detachment seems more in character for Lupin than fierce hatred. But as he doesn't always succesfully hide his feelings - occasionally, Harry registers something - we can assume he's not really devoid of emotions. Renee From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 1 22:27:04 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 22:27:04 -0000 Subject: Trusting characters Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119004 Siriusly Snapey Susan wrote: > Actually, I don't really care what kind of good Sirius could have > done or not done; I'm merely spouting off about what I think Sirius > himself might have been thinking. Some posters have been arguing > that Sirius' case as presented makes no sense -- that he must've > been in on a double-cross of James & Lily -- or that he was a > coward. I'm trying to show an alternative way of looking at his > actions which might bring us to a different conclusion. > > As for contacting DD, do we know that he didn't? [I'm asking that > question in haste, so the answer may be yes, we do know that!] My > reference to DD's remark that Order members have more reliable means > of communication [snipped from my previous post] was meant to show > that I believe he might have been able to contact him while he was > on his way or as he arrived. > Carol responds: Surely if he'd contacted Dumbledore, telling him that he thought the Potters were in danger and why he was worried, Dumbledore would have stopped him from going to Godric's Hollow, not to mention chasing after Peter. And DD would have known that Sirius wasn't the Secret Keeper, because Sirius would have told him. So even if Sirius did stupidly go after Peter, DD would at least have known that he didn't betray the Potters and would have helped him to get a fair trial for supposedly killing Peter and the Muggles. So I'd say it's almost a given that he *didn't* contact DD. None of which makes him ESE! I'm with you there. It was in character for him to go off half-cocked without consulting Dumbledore or Lupin or anyone else. I don't think he's evil (though under certain conditions, especialy post-Azkaban, he comes dangerously close). He's just Siriusly Reckless Sirius. Or Rash. Or Thoughtless. Or Stupid. Choose your adjective. Carol From gbannister10 at aol.com Wed Dec 1 22:50:10 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 22:50:10 -0000 Subject: "The Great Humberto" was: Questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119005 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "hermionekitten9" wrote: > > Snow: > > (2)If the Dursley's are so against anything having to do with > magic, why was Dudley allowed to watch a magician on television? SS > The Letters From No One: Dudley whining to his mother "It's > Monday... The Great Humberto's on tonight. I want to stay somewhere > with a television." I may be wrong to think that the Great Humberto > is a magician but it sounds awfully similar to the Great Houdini. > Also it sounds as though this were a regiment of Dudley's weekly > routine. I realize that the Dursley's are more than permissive when > it comes to Dudley but when it comes to the dirty "M" word and the > possibility that Harry might be influenced if he were to see the > magician program, why was Dudley allowed to watch it? (It is the > small somewhat insignificant details I tend to question) kitten: I remember not too long ago on this list, this was > discussed... it was mentioned by someone that "The Great Humberto" > might have been a nickname for a wrestler (or maybe even a > boxer)... "The Rock" "Stone Cold Steve Austin" "Andre the > Giant" "Hulk Hogan" ect. ect. ect. And not a magician I really > liked this idea, because it fits with Dudley's aggressive > cough*bullying*cough temperament, Dudley would be upset if he > couldn't watch people fight on television.-g- Geoff: I have always been of the opinion that this guy is a stage magician. I do not think that he would be a wrestler or something akin to that because Dudley was expecting to see him on a Monday night and I don't recall TV schedules including things like wrestling during the week. That would be fare for the wall-to-wall sports coverage on a Saturday... I think Vernon would be able to differentiate between someone such as a stage magician whom he would consider to be a fake, using legerdemain and deception to produce their results as opposed to genuine members of the Wizarding World. After all, the neighbours would probably watch the Great Humbrto with the same measure of suspended disbelief as the Dursleys, wouldn't they? Geoff http://www.aspectsofexmoor.com For Exmoor National Park views, walks and West Somerset Railway photos From Nrsedany2be at aol.com Wed Dec 1 22:55:13 2004 From: Nrsedany2be at aol.com (Nrsedany2be at aol.com) Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 17:55:13 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Slytherin House again. Was: Re: Problem with OotP? (was: ... Message-ID: <1e9.3028f043.2edfa5d1@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119006 Maybe one of the things the movie foreshadowed to was Snape not being pureblood, the line in shrieking shack about Snape playing with his chemistry set. If he was a pureblood the line would have been better if Snape was playing with his potions set. Either way it was very funny. Danielle [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From Vivamus at TaprootTech.com Wed Dec 1 23:08:30 2004 From: Vivamus at TaprootTech.com (Vivamus) Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 18:08:30 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Hermione's Time Turner In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200412011809619.SM01064@devbox> No: HPFGUIDX 119007 > Vivamus wrote: > > > > I'm pretty sure we haven't seen the end of time travel, though. > Remember the Quidditch World Cup? Fred and George bet everything > they had on a hundred to one shot, with complete confidence, > and no indication of surprise that they had won. Somehow, > they *knew.* snip> > > > Carol responds: > I've addressed this before, so apologies to anyone who > already knows my views. IMO, it's extremely unlikely that the > twins had a time turner. They seem to be rare items and > highly regulated. All it took, really, to win that bet was > brains and the Twins' usual creative approach to everything. > > They knew that Krum was the best Seeker in the world, > therefore he would catch the Snitch; they also knew that > Ireland had the best > *team* in the world, therefore they would win the match. Just > because the Seeker catching the Snitch usually wins the game > doesn't mean that it always does so. The twins figured out > that Ireland's Keeper would prevent Bulgaria from scoring > many goals and that Ireland would probably get in lots of > goals before the Snitch was caught. They also knew that Krum > was a merciless player familiar with the Wronski Feint and > other diversionary tactics and that he would do everything he > could to prevent Ireland's Seeker from scoring. > > Putting all this together, they reasoned correctly that > Ireland would win but Krum would catch the Snitch. Ludo > Bagman, being a lot less clever and creative than the Twins, > put up big money (Leprechaun's gold, to be sure) against such > an unusual outcome, but the Twins were right. > > No time-turning necessary. They just needed, like Snape on > various occasions, to put two and two together. > > Carol, who thinks the Twins would have been a lot less angry > about being cheated if they had cheated themselves Vivamus: Thanks for the kind words about my post. I think we'll have to disagree on the Weasley twins, though. While your analysis of what they might have done is certainly reasonable, and certainly within their abilities, they expressed a confidence, both in their attitude and it betting everything they had, that suggested to me that they weren't guessing. After all, these guys are poor, and are scraping after every knut. No matter how good their reasoning, it would not, I think, be smart to bet every knut on a long shot. Ah, well, perhaps JKR will reveal more about that in the next book. Vivamus From kreneeb at hotmail.com Thu Dec 2 00:01:39 2004 From: kreneeb at hotmail.com (hermionekitten9) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 00:01:39 -0000 Subject: "The Great Humberto" was: Questions Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119008 Geoff: I do not think that he would be a wrestler or something akin to that because Dudley was expecting to see him on a Monday night and I don't recall TV schedules including things like wrestling during the week. That would be fare for the wall-to-wall sports coverage on a Saturday... Kitten: I don't know Smackdown, a high rating wrestling show, is on regularly Thursday nights where I'm from (I have an 12 year old nephew who watches I don't-g-) and I don't ever recall a magician having a tv show whether it be Monday, Wednesday, Friday, or Sunday nor can I imagine Dudley wanting to watch a magic show on tv I can, on the other hand, imagine him watching a wrestling show. Geoff: I think Vernon would be able to differentiate between someone such as a stage magician whom he would consider to be a fake, using legerdemain and deception to produce their results as opposed to genuine members of the Wizarding World. After all, the neighbours would probably watch the Great Humbrto with the same measure of suspended disbelief as the Dursleys, wouldn't they? Kitten: this is an interesting point, Would Vernon and Petunia let Dudley watch a magic tv Show? One would think-g- but Vernon and family freaked out when Harry told Dudley to say the "magic" word, in CoS, so I don't see them being able to differentiate between the two. Kitten From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 2 00:18:55 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 00:18:55 -0000 Subject: Trusting characters Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119009 Azriona wrote: When Sirius goes to find Peter, he doesn't know where Peter is or why he isn't there. Peter is in the Order - for all Sirius knows, DD has called Peter over for tea. For Sirius to go running off to GH - not having a clue what he'll actually find there - is just plain stupid. The moment he Apparates in, he could find himself in a firefight and be killed, whereas if he contacts DD: "James and Lily are in trouble, Peter was their SK and now he's gone," DD can figure out fast what's happening, and provide Sirius with a lot more backup. Carol responds: FWIW, he didn't even apparate in. He arrived on his flying motocycle! Why, I don't know. Apparation would have been faster and a whole lot quieter. Did he somehow know that Harry was alive and expect to fly away with him? If so, how did he know? If not, what was he thinking? Convenient for Hagrid that he happened to arrive that way, but not the clearest thinking on Sirius's part. Carol, who's still confused by the lending vs. giving of the motorcycle but won't get back into that now From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 2 00:33:05 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 00:33:05 -0000 Subject: The silver hand (Was: The Darkness Within) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119010 spacedoutspacecadet wrote: > I personally am not a fan of little old Peter and as such would love > to see Remus while in wolf form tear him to shreads! However that > brings into question the whole problem with the silver hand, > something that I know has been discussed in great detail... so I wont > get on that topic. Carol responds: Speaking of the silver hand, wasn't it just conjured out of thin air? Has anyone considered the possibility that it might just evaporate after a few hours or days like Leprechaun gold? We haven't seen Peter at all since the graveyard scene in GoF where he was so grateful for the beautiful and powerful ne hand. Might that be the reason? And yet it seems like a waste of an interesting plot device to get rid of it so easily, especially given the connection between silver and werewolves. Does anyone have any ideas how JKR could get around the problem of a conjured object being transient? Or will I have to just accept it as another Flint because the hand is too important to the plot to have it follow the magical "laws" that JKR herself has established? Carol, who thinks that if there's a conflict between Pettigrew and werewolf!Lupin, Pettigrew will win From HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Thu Dec 2 00:38:36 2004 From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com) Date: 2 Dec 2004 00:38:36 -0000 Subject: New file uploaded to HPforGrownups Message-ID: <1101947916.39826.86104.w52@yahoogroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119011 Hello, This email message is a notification to let you know that a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the HPforGrownups group. File : /Essays/hpfgu_cmc.pdf Uploaded by : larryngocnguyen83 Description : I wrote this for my term paper for Advanced Critical Approaches to Digital Media. It talks about Harry Potter for Grownups and the relationship between cmc technology and online discourse You can access this file at the URL: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Essays/hpfgu_cmc.pdf To learn more about file sharing for your group, please visit: http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/files Regards, larryngocnguyen83 From HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Thu Dec 2 00:39:45 2004 From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com) Date: 2 Dec 2004 00:39:45 -0000 Subject: New file uploaded to HPforGrownups Message-ID: <1101947985.6636.90140.w74@yahoogroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119012 Hello, This email message is a notification to let you know that a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the HPforGrownups group. File : /Essays/hpfgu_cmc.doc Uploaded by : larryngocnguyen83 Description : This is the same as the pdf, but as a Word document. You can access this file at the URL: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Essays/hpfgu_cmc.doc To learn more about file sharing for your group, please visit: http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/files Regards, larryngocnguyen83 From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Thu Dec 2 00:51:59 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 00:51:59 -0000 Subject: Harry's Protection (was Re: Questions) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119013 Kneasy: > It'd be a bit of an anticlimax if Harry was proofed against absolutely every kind of spell, assault and accident. Where's the tension in an impervious hero? Even Superman had his Achilles heel. > > I posted (a few months back) that the 'Ancient Magic' that protects > Harry is only effective against Voldemort Valky: Yes I agree with you Kneasy, I believe the blood protection and the surge that repelled Vernon Dursley are not the same power. The former being the force that caused Quirrelmorts *hands to burn* and the latter, perhaps a completely different power that the Dark Lord knows *not*. Kneasy: > and even then it was Voldy's *person* but not his spells. I > wouldn't be surprised if the 'blood protection' is/was not as comprehensive as some would think or wish. > Valky: Which is kind of where I am going with this investigation. In the Man with Two Faces PS Quirrel says about his attempt to on Harry's life. " 'Master I cannot *hold* him - my hands - my hands'" Harry asks DD later, " ' But why couldn't Quirrel *touch* me?' " To which DD replies " '....It is in your very skin......It was agony to *touch* a person marked by something so good." [Emphasis on hold and touch is my own] But note that Quirrel said that he could not *hold* Harry as well. Now it can easily be translated that the burning sensation from the touch was what made Harry *impossible to hold*, that is until OOtP when we discover Harry in the *exact* same situation with Vernon Dursley, then it becomes more difficult to dismiss it that way. Kneasy: > Wandless magic seemed to protect him when he was at his previous > school and I'm willing to accept that it was the same automatic magic that kept him out of Vernon's grasping fists. At a rough guess I'd be willing to bet that 'wandless magic' is a wizard's (or wizard child's) protection against unwelcome Muggle attentions or possible damage from non-magical events, such as Neville being dropped out of a window. Certainly I can't ever remember it being reported as functioning reliably against magic or other wizards. > Valky: It could well be all this that you say here Kneasy, but thats not very exciting. ;D Kneasy: > Now if these other types of magic (Ancient, wandless) provide a > measure of protection against *specific* types of threat against Harry, then the next question is - "What does blood protection guard him against?" closely followed by another question - "If it protects Harry, why is DD seemingly so pleased that Voldy has Harry's blood in him?" > Valky: Yes, here is the crux of my investigation. We are given the prophecy in OOtP and we are told that Harry has a power that the Dark Lord does *not* know of. I expect quite some foreshadowing of this power in action has also been given to us through the course of the series. I am looking in only four passages and so far it is adding up. As was quoted for me by Geoff Bannister in an earlier post, so far all that has been thoroughly discussed by DD, Voldemort and Harry is the *touch* of his skin bearing the protection of his mothers love. There are two other mysteries about Harry's protection, one is the protection of the Durselys home, and the other is the *impossible to hold by the throat (strangle)* Harry. IMO JKR has given us almost all that she will ever give about the home, I am sure that most will agree that it seems that protection is wearing at the edges now and will soon be a moot point because it will be gone. However, the impossible to hold Harry is quite a new emergence in the series, and Voldemort seems to know nothing about it. Kneasy; > Back to the old "Dumbledore's gleam". > IIRC no-one ever has explained that satisfactorily. > And I'm not even going to try. > Valky: Well I am. :D This is why I asked for the quote. Harry says "....he was right.... it worked.... he *touched* my face" And Dumbledore gets a curious gleam of triumph in his eyes. From apeiron at comcast.net Thu Dec 2 01:00:23 2004 From: apeiron at comcast.net (Christopher Nehren) Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 20:00:23 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] OOP: The unknown power In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20041202010023.GC60854@prophecy.dyndns.org> No: HPFGUIDX 119014 On Tue, Nov 30, 2004 at 21:35:48 EST, ignatia_wildfire scribbled these curious markings: > I think it was obvious from the way Dumbledore spoke - I believe the > power Harry has that Valdermort will never have is LOVE... I've said this before, and I'll say it again: I really, really hope not. If that were so, it would make the series fake, Disneylike, cartoonish, trite, cliche (I'll type that accented e when someone tells me how to access such characters on my FreeBSD console), and so forth. Christopher -- I abhor a system designed for the "user", if that word is a coded pejorative meaning "stupid and unsophisticated". -- Ken Thompson Linux: "How rebellious ... in a conformist sort of way." Unix is user friendly. However, it isn't idiot friendly. From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Thu Dec 2 01:03:52 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 01:03:52 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119015 > > Alla previously: > No, but I think that James' principles were partially the reason for the bullying. > > > Potioncat: > > Just to clarify, Do you think the principles would justify the > > bullying? I can think of a lot of people who bully on principle, but they are still bullies. > > Alla: > > I think I said it many times. NO, nothing will justify bullying, > absolutely nothing, but I also think that it may explain some things, unjustififiable as they are. > Valky: I would just like to go on record here saying that I, also, do not think that the bullying is justified by the principles that may or may not be underlying in part (or all) of the cause. I initially took up the gauntlet on James behalf because I found it difficult to accept that the Hero!James that saved Severus in the later year had an icy cold heart in fifth year, in spite of his reprehensible behaviour. Alla: > I see no reason to deny backstory to Marauders. Snape is not the > only one, who is allowed to have unknown reasons for doing things, > you know. :o) Valky: ;) That's the spirit Alla. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 2 01:06:08 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 01:06:08 -0000 Subject: Snape/Occlumency again (Was: Does Viktor Krum become an important In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119016 Finwitch wrote: > > But Krum aside, I like Tonks. She'd be nice for a DADA-teacher (and > being an auror, she DOES know her stuff)... or perhaps someone able > of Legilemency and Occlumency. (So Harry can learn it - he'll never > get it from Snape). Carol responds: If, as I've postulated earlier, Snape taught Occlumency in the standard way, telling Harry what he needs to know and then having him protect himself through his own reflexes against the invading Legilimency spell, perhaps Harry knows all he needs to know. He just needs to practice, and without the desire to see the dream preventing him from doing so, he can probably clear his mind before he sleeps. He should also be feeling less of the venomous anger that Voldy was pouring into his mind, making him react like a striking snake instead of a normal teenage boy. The question is whether Harry even *needs* Occlumency now since the vision failed to accomplish its objective (the Prophecy orb is broken and LV doesn't know that's not the only record) and LV's attempt to possess Harry also failed. What would be the use of continuing the lessons now, under Snape or Dumbledore or anyone else? The only thing I can think of is the need to block his thoughts from Voldemort in the final confrontation, and since LV wasn't able to read his mind to determine where the Philosopher's Stone was in SS/PS and hasn't attempted to use Legilimency on him in any other direct confrontation, I don't quite see the need to learn it now. Snape *has* to lie to Voldemort if he confronts him directly. Harry has no need to conceal anything from him as far as I can see. OTOH, if he *does* need to use Occlumency in facing his most hated enemy, what better way to practice than to confront *Snape* attempting to invade his mind? I don't think Harry really "got" it before when Snape said, "You are handing me weapons." Now, surely, he would understand--and do what he was told. Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 2 01:33:11 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 01:33:11 -0000 Subject: The Darkness Within In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119017 azriona wrote: > Except what could Peter have done in that instance? Had he set Harry free, Voldy would have killed him and used another wizard's blood to bring himself back. By taking Harry's blood at that point, and bringing Voldy back to power, he managed something quite incredible - he rendered Voldy mortal. Carol responds: I have a problem here--not with azrionas's argument, which I agree with, but with the idea that Voldy is now mortal. He himself has said that he will settle, temporarily, for having his body back and not yet seek immortality, but if he's mortal, why can only Harry destroy him? We've already discussed why DD didn't try to kill LV at the MoM, but if LV is mortal, *couldn't* DD have killed him, Prophecy or no Prophecy? Either A) the Prophecy is wrong (or being wrongly interpreted by DD, Harry, and most readers) or B) LV is wrong about his own mortality: he's immortal with the exception of an Achilles heel named Harry Potter. Can anyone think of a third possibility (C)) that will make sense of this apparent contradiction? How can Voldy be mortal and still be killable only by Harry? Carol in Tucson, wondering if azriona also lives in Azriona, erm, Arizona From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 2 01:55:05 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 01:55:05 -0000 Subject: Another Flint? (Was: When?) In-Reply-To: <20041130220014.93903.qmail@web53103.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119018 kjirstem wrote: > > > > I've wondered if the Creeveys were part house-elf since they are always described as being very small. > Juli: responded: > Half-elves? is that even possible? They are small but I was thinking > 4 feet tall or 1.20 meters, that's short for a 14 year old, but not > a midget, I always believed they were 100% muggle, and they just > come from a short family. Would a half-elf be allowed to enter > Hogwarts? Carol responds: Well, a half-giant (Hagrid) was allowed to enter Hogwarts, and some posters have speculated that Flitwick is half house-elf (or half golbin) But I think that first, no one would have thought those kids were muggle-born if the remotely resembled house-elves, who, besides being extremely small, are completely bald and have huge pointy ears. And the likelihood of a house-elf meeting and marrying a Muggle is also extremely small. (I don't think a house-elf would even marry a wizard given their born-to-serve mentality.) The fact that Colin was one of the basilisk's victims also seems to confirm that he really is Muggle-born. Carol, who thinks that Flitwick is also just a very small wizard (like Dedalus Diggle) From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu Dec 2 01:59:53 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 01:59:53 -0000 Subject: Did Sirius *ever* consider consequences? (was: Trusting characters) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119019 SSSusan: > > I definitely won't argue with you that Sirius was rash & > > reckless in general, Carol, but I do believe that he did at > > times consider consequences. What about his decision to > > actually *answer* some of Harry's questions in chapter 5 of > > OotP? Pippin: > It was a good decision, but did Sirius get there by considering > the consequences? I thought he was more concerned with > assering Harry's rights, and his own rights as godfather. It > seems to me Sirius never liked thinking about what could go > wrong or what would happen once his goal was achieved.But in > this case, it was considering the consequences that had led > Dumbledore and Molly astray. > > Molly, as we saw in the boggart episode, was unable to shift her > thoughts away from what might go wrong. Dumbledore's > thinking is nothing if not long-range. In OOP it was *too* > long-range; he wasn't able to alter his plans or his thinking to > take account of the circumstances he did not foresee. SSSusan again: These are excellent points, Pippin. You may be correct that Sirius did not actually think this through so much as just believe it was *right* for Harry to know. It probably is not much in his nature to do a whole lot of "consequence estimation"... but I do think he wasn't totally incapable of it. Jen already pointed out his behavior in GoF, and I agree with her on that. As for Molly & DD, again I think you make an interesting point. They DID look at and consider consequences... but doing so might not have led them to the best decision or actions. So where does that leave Sirius in this OotP moment? Who was "right" and who was "wrong"? And why do we always seem to end up with murky instead of clear- cut. :-) Siriusly Snapey Susan From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu Dec 2 02:12:22 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 02:12:22 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119020 Carol earlier: >>> And there's no indication that anything terrible has yet happened in his [James'] young life to stir him up and start him thinking about serious issues like VW1. <<< SSSusan responded: >> This is true--we've no backstory for James' early life yet. OTOH, we do know that Sirius wanted to escape his pureblood, DA-leaning family, and where did he choose to go? To James' family. *Maybe* that was because James was his best buddy by then. Or *maybe* it was that James and his family were *known* to Sirius to offer up a home where the Dark Arts were detested. Because we can't know this one way or the other, I just don't see any reason to believe that Sirius was misremembering. Yeah, James was an ass here. But maybe he was just an ass. A truly DA-hating ass. I don't see any compelling reason to not read the scene this way.<< Carol responds: > And I don't see any compelling reason to view the fun-loving, > thoughtless, egotistical James as holding any serious convictions > at this point. No doubt he took his parents' teachings for > granted, and no doubt Severus did the same, but I can see no > evidence that their running conflict is anything but > personal. "Because he exists" is not an indication that James > opposes the Dark Arts or anything else about Severus's philosophy. SSSusan: But why do you assume that Snape has a *philosophy* but James has no serious convictions? I don't see where that comes from. It's just all conjecture at this point, and it seems that you've decided to conjecture James a certain way and Snape another, while I'm trying to point out that there is no compelling reason to have to introduce Sirius' misremembering something just so that James can be painted as having not yet thought about something when we have people who've told us that James hated the Dark Arts. Carol: > It's Severus as a *person* that he seems to dislike. So again I think that Sirius may be projecting *his* > values onto James or at least exaggerating the extent of James's > opposition to the Dark Arts, etc., in the Pensieve scene. > > Surely you don't think he's bullying Severus *on principle*? SSSusan: I guess I'd answer, why NOT believe that at least some of the bullying was based on principle? I'm not arguing that James didn't have a personal dislike of Snape -- the "because he exists" remark does show that -- but I don't see how/why we should assume that some of that dislike didn't have something to do w/ Snape's interest in the Dark Arts. It's what James' friends believed to be true; why doubt that it was at least a component of it?; why assume Sirius was projecting? I just don't see that as necessary to a belief that James hated Snape *and* hated the Dark Arts. Siriusly Snapey Susan From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Thu Dec 2 02:16:45 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 02:16:45 -0000 Subject: The Darkness Within In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119021 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > azriona wrote: > > By taking Harry's blood at that point, > and bringing Voldy back to power, he managed something quite > incredible - he rendered Voldy mortal. > > > Carol responds: > We've already discussed why DD didn't try to kill LV at the MoM, but if LV is mortal, *couldn't* DD have killed him, Prophecy or no Prophecy? > Valky: I think DD said he *could* kill him but that it would not be satisfactory. The prophecy says that the "one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord approaches" The word vanquish is too *carefully chosen* to simply mean *kill* I should like to think, and some of the synonyms for vanquish are : overpower, overturn, humble, master, overcome, quell, reduce, repress, rout ... among many others. These are the things that *only Harry* can do. Although while LV is mortal someone else might *kill* him. Carol: > Either A) the Prophecy is wrong (or being wrongly interpreted by DD, Harry, and most readers) Valky: I don't think DD is interpreting it wrongly. DD says: " It means that the only one with a chance of conquering Lord Voldemort for good...." and later Harry asks does "..neither can live while the other survives.... mean that one of us has to kill the other" To *that* DD replies "Yes" Whch I take as saying that DD interprets *that* line as meaning that one has to kill the other, omitting the part about the mysterious power, because he is not *asked* to include it. Carol: or B) LV is wrong about his own mortality: he's immortal with the exception of an Achilles heel named Harry Potter. > Valky: I think that you are right about this. Strangely enough. > Carol: > Can anyone think of a third possibility? Valky: I think that the third possibilty is the inherent meaning of the carefully chosen words, Vanquish and Conquer. From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Thu Dec 2 02:18:04 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 02:18:04 -0000 Subject: The Darkness Within In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119022 > Carol responds: > I have a problem here--not with azrionas's argument, which I agree > with, but with the idea that Voldy is now mortal. He himself has said > that he will settle, temporarily, for having his body back and not yet > seek immortality, but if he's mortal, why can only Harry destroy him? > > We've already discussed why DD didn't try to kill LV at the MoM, but > if LV is mortal, *couldn't* DD have killed him, Prophecy or no Prophecy? > > Either A) the Prophecy is wrong (or being wrongly interpreted by DD, > Harry, and most readers) or B) LV is wrong about his own mortality: > he's immortal with the exception of an Achilles heel named Harry Potter. > > Can anyone think of a third possibility (C)) that will make sense of > this apparent contradiction? How can Voldy be mortal and still be > killable only by Harry? > And Kneasy wrote in #118980 > Back to the old "Dumbledore's gleam". > IIRC no-one ever has explained that satisfactorily. Neri: I have suggested a possible solution to these problems in the frame VASSAL theory: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/116371 While this theory is currently a bit stranded, the reason has nothing to do with my suggested solution. Briefly, I suggest that LV agreed to become mortal again only if he'd also gain Harry's protection. With the blood trick he indeed managed to get this protection for himself, but by sharing blood with Harry, he is now vulnerable to Harry, exactly in the same way that Harry is vulnerable to him. So LV is now mortal, but protected against everybody except Harry. This explains DD's gleam of triumph: he realized that LV again made the prophecy come true by his own actions. This also explains why DD didn't try to kill LV in the MoM ? he believes that LV is protected against anybody except Harry. But there's an additional factor that even DD perhaps doesn't realize: the Shylock Effect (details in the above link). Neri From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu Dec 2 02:31:35 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 02:31:35 -0000 Subject: Knowing it was Snape (was: What has Snape seen) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119023 SSSusan earlier: >>> I admit that I assumed the teenage boy to be Snape, but I know some have wondered whether that is true, as well as whether the hook- nosed man is Snape or perhaps Snape's father, with the cowering boy being Snape. I would argue that we cannot be certain of any of it because it's all based upon Harry's perception, and we've been shown before that the narrator has "allowed" Harry's perception to be presented as fact previously, only to have it eventually be shown to be a misperception. For another example, just think of GoF, when Harry is preparing to enter the Yule Ball with the other champions & their dates. The narrator says that Harry saw Viktor Krum with a pretty girl whom he did not know. But of course he DID know her! It was Hermione; Harry simply did not recognize her. <<< Carol responds: > The difference is that we're looking at Snape's memories, not the > student body of Hogwarts. He has to be present in all of them. > Ergo, the lonely teenager zapping flies has to be Severus, as does > the boy on the bucking broom. Harry is therefore most likely right > in also identifying the small crying boy rather than the hook- > nosed man as snape. He knows very well what the adult Snape looks > like and he knows whose memories he's viewing. SSSusan: Once again we're at cross purposes. I don't understand why Snape has to be IN each memory. I have all kinds of memories of people and places and events, and sometimes the pictures I have in my mind are of those *other* people and places: my grandfather smoking a pipe; my mom & dad playing tennis; my brother graduating from med school. I'm in the audience, as it were, and I don't believe that if someone accessed my memories they'd see ME; rather, they'd see those other individuals *as I saw them*, but I'd be nowhere in sight. Carol: > Who else would the teenage boy and the broom riding boy be but > Snape? SSSusan: It's likely it is Snape. My point was simply to suggest avoiding saying we *know* something, when it's only Harry's perception/recognition that we're trusting in drawing the conclusion. Did Snape have an older brother we know nothing about and Snape watched him shooting down flies? Who knows? Carol: > If the death of his child and wife (whom the hook-nosed man > doesn't seem to love much) were the trigger that caused Snape to > leave the DEs, the little boy could have been no more than two, > and the hook-nosed man a 21-year-old Snape. There's no indication > that either the boy or the man is that young. SSSusan: This was Kneasy's theory, rather than mine, but I will say this much. "There's no indication that [they are] that young" doesn't equate to "They weren't young." This strikes me as such a leap: it wasn't pointed out, so thus it must not be? That's part of the fun of the exercises we engage in here -- what did JKR leave out and what did she put in... and what can be made of that? One possibility is that it's not the "obvious" conclusion that Harry drew which is the truth. If there were corroboration -- Snape calling someone by name or being called by name in his memory or DD telling Harry that Snape had a horrendous childhood or a nasty father -- we'd have more to go on. But as it is, we know *nothing* about Snape's background beyond what we've been told about his being up to his eyeballs in the DA when he got to Hogwarts, that he knew more dark spells than most 7th years [paraphrased]. So in my book there's lots of room to question and to wonder if JKR's schnookering us here. Siriusly Snapey Susan From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu Dec 2 02:39:21 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 02:39:21 -0000 Subject: Lupin's character arc (was: Character Arcs) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119024 Boyd wrote: > > *Lupin is a werewolf, but that little character flaw has already > put Harry in danger in the endgame of one book, so I think we're > done with that. My feeling is that when in human form, he is a > truly good guy who'll help DD/Harry in whatever way they want in > the endgame. Seems to fit her theme of not judging a book by its > cover. And I'm not sure how much we'll see of Lupin in the final > two books anyway. He's not necessary to the plot anymore > unless Jo weaves him back in somehow. Pippin: > So far none of us have been all that great at guessing what JKR > is going to do with her characters,not that it's ever stopped me. > I was amused that Kneasy put Pettigrew at 50/50 but Lupin at > 90/10 -- surely these two should affect one another? If Pettigrew > is going to choose good after all, then another Marauder needs > to choose bad. James and Sirius are out of the running, pace > Kneasy, as neither of them is available to be fed to the > dementors. If Peter escapes, then I'm afraid Lupin is doomed. > > As you say, if Lupin isn't evil, then JKR has run out of things > to do with him, and I don't think she has. SSSusan: How 'bout the (I suppose boringly) simple possibility that Lupin will serve in the capacity of Harry's mentor? The only remaining member of his parents' tightknit group, the one who no one seems to accuse of being rash or reckless? If Peter is truly the bad egg and Lupin is the good guy (as I believe), then this would be a nice role for him to take on. Goodness knows Harry could use some support from an adult... and one who's been willing to teach him things, answer *some* of his questions, and stand up to the Dursleys. There *is* some detachment there, Pippin, you're right, but I see it as less extreme than you, and largely understandable given the nature of his "curse" -- never wanting to get too close to people, never feeling fully a part of anything, being shunned. I could see him & Harry being good for one another, actually. Siriusly Snapey Susan From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Thu Dec 2 02:40:04 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 02:40:04 -0000 Subject: Hermione's Time Turner In-Reply-To: <200412011809619.SM01064@devbox> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119025 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Vivamus" wrote: > > Vivamus wrote: > > > > > > > I'm pretty sure we haven't seen the end of time travel, though. Remember the Quidditch World Cup? Fred and George bet everything they had on a hundred to one shot, with complete confidence, and no indication of surprise that they had won. Somehow, they *knew.* > snip> > > > > > Carol responds: > > I've addressed this before, so apologies to anyone who > > already knows my views. IMO, it's extremely unlikely that the > > twins had a time turner. They seem to be rare items and > > highly regulated. All it took, really, to win that bet was > > brains and the Twins' usual creative approach to everything. > > > > They knew that Krum was the best Seeker in the world, > > therefore he would catch the Snitch; they also knew that > > Ireland had the best *team* in the world, therefore they would win the match. Vivamus again: > I think we'll have to disagree on the Weasley twins, though. While your analysis of what they might have done is certainly reasonable, and certainly within their abilities, they expressed a confidence, both in their attitude and it betting everything > they had, that suggested to me that they weren't guessing. Valky: Very interesting argument Vivamus, and although Carol, your reasoning is sharp and highly logical, I wonder just how far this investigation really has gone. I mean, has anyone, for example, referenced GOF for the moment that the twins actually first appeared at the Burrow on the day of the QWC. If they had time turned I am sure there would be some kind of hint of them appearing to be in two places at once. I don't have GOF here at the moment, and Oh I am missing it right now with all this interesting conversation going on, perhaps I need a second copy. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 2 02:54:44 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 02:54:44 -0000 Subject: Trusting characters Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: <20041130200314.92084.qmail@web54107.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119026 Kneasy's list: > Major characters: > > DD - sneaky, devious as hell, manipulative, but a goody > Moody > Molly > Arthur > Ron > Hermione - unless someone sneaky offers to free the Elves > in return for a small favour > Neville > MM > Hagrid > Snape - yes, he can be trusted 100% > Lupin - 90% sure > Peter - 50/50 at the moment > > Those I don't trust: > Harry - he's got a bit of Voldy in his head > Sirius > Bagman > Fudge > Lockhart > > Lucius Malfoy is a special case - he can't be trusted to stay evil. > > The other baddies can be trusted to stay bad, I think. Carol responds: I more or less agree with this list (except for Harry, who as the heor will do the right thing, whatever it is, at the end of Book 7). Sirius is dead so it doesn't really matter if he could be trusted; Lockhart I don't think we'll see again (didn't JKR indicate as much in the World Book Day chat?); Bagman I think is weak and stupid but not evil--he could, however, be used as an unwitting dupe again; Fudge is iffy, but if he blames Dumbledore for his fall from power, things could get nasty. What about the other Weasleys, Kneasy? I would add the Twins to the "trust" list, with poor Percy as a "maybe," though I think he'll come around eventually, perhaps after losing a family member. And probably Bill and Charlie are good guys as well, with Bill slightly iffier than Charlie. Carol, who just for fun would like to see and ESE!Charlie argument From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 2 03:01:59 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 03:01:59 -0000 Subject: Lupin's character arc (was: Character Arcs) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119027 SSSusan: How 'bout the (I suppose boringly) simple possibility that Lupin will serve in the capacity of Harry's mentor? The only remaining member of his parents' tightknit group, the one who no one seems to accuse of being rash or reckless? If Peter is truly the bad egg and Lupin is the good guy (as I believe), then this would be a nice role for him to take on. Goodness knows Harry could use some support from an adult... and one who's been willing to teach him things, answer *some* of his questions, and stand up to the Dursleys. There *is* some detachment there, Pippin, you're right, but I see it as less extreme than you, and largely understandable given the nature of his "curse" -- never wanting to get too close to people, never feeling fully a part of anything, being shunned. I could see him & Harry being good for one another, actually. > Alla: OK, let's see whether I can make this post not being completely "Me, too" Yes, this would be ideal role for Remus to take, IMO. Ihave no doubt that he genuinely loves Harry and maybe the realisation that Harry needs him and that no one else now will stand up for Harry as Harry will help him to work on his character flaws. I don't know what Jo will do about Dumbledore/Harry relationship , but at the very least their relationship needs serious reparation. And someone needs to be there for Harry in the meanwhile Maybe helping Harry to heal and to train will get rid of Remus' passivity and self-doubt. Oh, and the other fond dream of mine - if Remus survives , maybe he will be cured at the end. Maybe Snape will cure him, it will make him famous and he will get off Harry's back? :o) OK, the last sentence was pretty out there, I admit. :) From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 2 03:07:36 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 03:07:36 -0000 Subject: Slytherin House again. Was: Re: Problem with OotP? (was: Pampering) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119028 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > "Jeanette" wrote: > And there is the last practical, brutal, point, that yes it might > be better to have potential dark wizards where they can be known > rather than have them grow up hidden in dark corners. Also you can > control what they are taught both magically and morally. > > > > Alla: > > Again, very true and pureblood ideology is disgusting to me, but > could we really make judgments about eleven year olds as potentially > dark wisards? I am not so sure at all. Carol responds: Neither am I. and the Sorting Hat, which seems to have a conscience, probably wouldn't put children in Slytherin if it thought that placement would make them evil. The hat isn't looking for an interest in the Dark Arts as a criterion for placement, as far as we know. And there has to be a place for the cunning and ambitious types to feel at home, doesn't there? In addition, Slytherin House is part of the Hogwarts tradition, honoring one of the four founders, and certain students, notably those from certain pureblood families, expect and *want* to be placed there. Imagine Draco as a Ravenclaw and his thuggy friends as Hufflepuffs. Would any of them be happy with that placement? Would their Ravenclaw and Hufflepuff housemates be happy to have them there? The only alternative that I can see, other than doing away with all four houses, is to have a separate school for the Slytherin types--and that would almost certainly be worse. If the Lucius Malfoy types got control of it, it would quickly turn into another Durmstrang, a producer of Dark Wizards. Its graduates would probably engage in a power struggle, with the winner becoming the next Grindelwald or Voldemort. How JKR can unite the houses and end the Slytherin vs. everyone else antagonism by the end of the seventh book, I don't know, but I don't think that eliminating *only* Slytherin is the answer. (Snape wouldn't like it, either. ;-) ) Carol From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 2 03:32:07 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 03:32:07 -0000 Subject: Slytherin House again. Was: Re: Problem with OotP? (was: Pampering) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119029 > Carol responds: > Neither am I. and the Sorting Hat, which seems to have a conscience,probably wouldn't put children in Slytherin if it thought that placement would make them evil. Alla: The question is why then? We are trying to find compelling reason for the existence of Slytherin House and honestly, I don't see one right now. It is a given that majority of Slytherin students becomes DE. Not only Slytherins become DE, but Slytherins do. There should be a reason why the House with racist ideology exists for 1000 years. There should be a reason why WW seems content to give up on some of the kids and be content with them growing up as future DE. As Del said no help seems to be given to those kids, since gang of Slytherins ALL became DE Carol: The hat isn't looking for an interest in the Dark Arts as a criterion for placement, as far as we know. And there has to be a place for the cunning and ambitious types to feel at home, doesn't there? Alla: No, but Hat sure does look for Purebloods. Unfortunately, cunning and ambition seems to be only secondary search criteria. Carol: In addition, Slytherin House is part of the > Hogwarts tradition, honoring one of the four founders, and certain > students, notably those from certain pureblood families, expect and > *want* to be placed there. Imagine Draco as a Ravenclaw and his thuggy friends as Hufflepuffs. Would any of them be happy with that placement? Would their Ravenclaw and Hufflepuff housemates be happy to have them there? Alla: Actually, I think it would have done Draco A LOT of good to be placed in Ravenclaw, or even better in Hufflepuff. He would have a chance to learn different values. Placing all those kids together and making them contage each other with the same poisonous ideas seems very strange to me. Carol: >> How JKR can unite the houses and end the Slytherin vs. everyone else antagonism by the end of the seventh book, I don't know, but I don't think that eliminating *only* Slytherin is the answer. (Snape wouldn'tlike it, either. ;-) ) > Alla: LOL! I was not suggesting eliminating only Slytherin, by all means. I think she is going towards elimination of the House system alltogether. We'll see. From willsonkmom at msn.com Thu Dec 2 03:33:18 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 03:33:18 -0000 Subject: Reputations (was Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119030 > > Alla: > > > > I think I said it many times. NO, nothing will justify bullying, > > absolutely nothing, but I also think that it may explain some > things, unjustififiable as they are. > > > > Valky: > I would just like to go on record here saying that I, also, do not > think that the bullying is justified by the principles that may or > may not be underlying in part (or all) of the cause. > I initially took up the gauntlet on James behalf because I found it > difficult to accept that the Hero!James that saved Severus in the > later year had an icy cold heart in fifth year, in spite of his > reprehensible behaviour. > > > Alla: > > I see no reason to deny backstory to Marauders. Snape is not the > > only one, who is allowed to have unknown reasons for doing things, > > you know. :o) > Potioncat: OK, so we all three perhaps, agree that James was being a jerk in this incident, although we may or may not agree on his motivation? I think McGonagall can be trusted when she talks about James and Lily being good people. And it appears that Snape may have been reliable in his description of young James. I have no trouble believing that somehow Severus' reputation concerning Dark Arts affected James' opinion of him, but I think there will be a surprising twist to that in later books. And it may involve Sirius' interpretation of the facts either as an adult looking back, or as a student at the time. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 2 03:34:16 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 03:34:16 -0000 Subject: Problem with OotP? (was: Pampering) In-Reply-To: <20041130215534.92172.qmail@web53103.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119031 Hannah wrote: Yes, and add to that the 'evil'Inquisitorial Squad seems to > > be made up entirely of Slytherins. Why? > Juli responded: I think it was all because of Draco Malfoy, his > dad must have told him to support in every possible > way DU, not to *help* the MoM, but to get DD and Harry > out of Hogwarts. The kids in the Inquisitorial Squad > (IS for short) are Draco's friends: Crabbe, Goyle, > Pansy Parkinson (he went with her to the Yule dance). > I don't think just because someone is Slytherin he/she > is evil, there are good Slytherins, like Snape (I just > love him), and Phineas Nigellus (right spelling?? > sorry), and probably many others we don't know, just > like someone from Grifindor can be evil > cough*Pettigrew*cough, or a Ravenclaw or a Hufflepuff. > It's just more important in our current story the > 'bad' Slytherins (Tom Riddle, Malfoy, Crabbe, > Goyle...). Carol responds: It's not just the current story, though. Voldemort was from Slytherin. I suspect that the "intimate friends" who already called him Lord Voldemort (in secret) before he left school were also Slytherins and became the original DEs. All or almost all of the "gang of Slytherins" that included Bellatrix and the Lestrange brothers became DEs. (The exception may be Narcissa, who nevertheless does not appear to be on the side of Light.) It appears that Karkaroff, who seems considerably older than this group, is also a Hogwarts alumnus, and I would be very surprised if he was not a Slytherin. Antonin Dolohov is perhaps an exception to the rule; I'm guessing that he came from Durmstrang. He seems even more evil than the run-of-the-mill DEs. There may be some exceptions--Avery and Rookwood, for example. And I can see Barty Jr. as a Ravenclaw gone very wrong. But the Slytherin/DE association is definitely there, and it extends to at least three members of the new Hogwarts generation. (I'm excluding Theo Nott, who is my candidate for the good Slytherin if there is one.) And note that Pansy Parkinson has her own gang of Slytherin girls, presumably including Millicent Bulstrode, who generally follow her lead as the Slytherin boys (excepting Nott and Zabini) follow Draco's. I don't like it; I think the whole idea of one "bad" house is unrealistic and wrong-headed; but I think there are few exceptions to the general rule just because that's the way JKR wrote the book. That's one reason why Snape, for me, is such a fascinating character. He seems to be a typical Slytherin in every way--probably pureblood, definitely ambitious and cunning, interested in the Dark Arts--and yet he has turned against his friends and his early conditioning and his natural instincts to fight against Voldemort--not openly yet, but almost certainly genuinely on the side of good. Thank God for Snape, because unless Theo Nott follows his example, he may be our one and only good Slytherin. (And Phineas, too, but he doesn't really count, being a portrait rather than a living wizard.) Carol, who supposes she should be equally grateful for Peter, the bad Gryffindor From dontask2much at yahoo.com Thu Dec 2 03:35:58 2004 From: dontask2much at yahoo.com (charme) Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 22:35:58 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Another Flint? (Was: When?) References: Message-ID: <013301c4d820$0a2ef860$6701a8c0@MITRE.ORG> No: HPFGUIDX 119032 > kjirstem wrote: >> > >> > I've wondered if the Creeveys were part house-elf since they are > always described as being very small. > >> > Juli: responded: >> Half-elves? is that even possible? They are small but I was thinking >> 4 feet tall or 1.20 meters, that's short for a 14 year old, but not >> a midget, I always believed they were 100% muggle, and they just >> come from a short family. Would a half-elf be allowed to enter >> Hogwarts? > > > Carol responds: > Well, a half-giant (Hagrid) was allowed to enter Hogwarts, and some > posters have speculated that Flitwick is half house-elf (or half golbin) > > But I think that first, no one would have thought those kids were > muggle-born if the remotely resembled house-elves, who, besides being > extremely small, are completely bald and have huge pointy ears. And > the likelihood of a house-elf meeting and marrying a Muggle is also > extremely small. (I don't think a house-elf would even marry a wizard > given their born-to-serve mentality.) > > The fact that Colin was one of the basilisk's victims also seems to > confirm that he really is Muggle-born. > charme: While I can understand your point, Carol, I've a huge interest in genetics and genealogy - and I don't think we've heard the last of what constitutes Muggle parentage. For example, canon in both CoS and OoP refers to the concepts of half-blood, pureblood, creature (like elves and goblins) and Muggle, yet to my warped way of thinking the only clearly defined definitions of that list are the first three. For example, what if 2 Squibs marry and generations pass with no wizard children? Do they become Muggle at some point after moving away from the wizarding world thru the generations and lo and behold, a wizard child is born to 2 seemingly Muggle parents? It's a curious thing to me that isn't fully explained, and only made more complex by JKR's statements regarding how she came up with the bloodline classifications and how they resembled Hitler's in determining "purity." Having been exposed to the US Holocaust Memorial Musuem as I have (it's in my proximity) and seen/read how bloodline purity was defined, I don't know that part wizard, elf, giant or goblin blood being introduced by some means in a family genealogy can be completely eliminated. charme From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 2 03:46:07 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 03:46:07 -0000 Subject: Reputations (was Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119033 > Potioncat: > OK, so we all three perhaps, agree that James was being a jerk in > this incident, although we may or may not agree on his motivation? Alla: Indeed, Potioncat. Your conclusion is correct. Me and you may not agree on James motivation. :) Potioncat: > I have no trouble believing that somehow Severus' reputation > concerning Dark Arts affected James' opinion of him, but I think > there will be a surprising twist to that in later books. And it may involve Sirius' interpretation of the facts either as an adult >looking back, or as a student at the time. Alla: Well, I believe the surprise will be in HOW BADLY Severus' reputation concernign Dark Arts affected James opinion of him. Are you saying that it all was just a misunderstanding on Sirius' behalf? I most definitely disagree. From willsonkmom at msn.com Thu Dec 2 03:54:06 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 03:54:06 -0000 Subject: Slytherin House again. Was: Re: Problem with OotP? (was: Pampering) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119034 > Carol responds: > Neither am I. and the Sorting Hat, which seems to have a conscience, > probably wouldn't put children in Slytherin if it thought that > placement would make them evil. The hat isn't looking for an interest > in the Dark Arts as a criterion for placement, as far as we know. And > there has to be a place for the cunning and ambitious types to feel at > home, doesn't there? Potioncat: We've only seen unpleasant Slytherins, and it may be JKR's point that ambition is a bad emotion. And as this is fiction, she may not be thinking,"oh, a poor little child has been condemned here"...but rather "look at what this sort of person is like." But, as I've said before, the traits themselves are not bad and we would be worse off without them, I think. No, I don't mean a Pureblood mentality nor Dark Arts (whatever that is) but certainly ambition, cunning, a drive to succeed can be most valuable. And by the way, I don't think Dark Arts defines Slytherin either. And I would think you could have Purebloods in any House who feel superior to the Muggleborn. Potioncat who would never make it in either Gryffindor or Slytherin and would like to be in Ravenclaw but would fit very well in Hufflepuff and BTW, what is a duffer? From willsonkmom at msn.com Thu Dec 2 04:01:20 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 04:01:20 -0000 Subject: Reputations (was Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119035 > Alla: > > Well, I believe the surprise will be in HOW BADLY Severus' > reputation concernign Dark Arts affected James opinion of him. Are > you saying that it all was just a misunderstanding on Sirius' > behalf? I most definitely disagree. Potioncat: >From the way it was first brought up in the books, I felt it was suspect. There seems to be a hook to that part of the backstory. Whether it's that we'll find why Severus was up to his eyeballs in Dark Arts, or why he had the reputation or if it was earned...I cannot say. There is certainly more to the Sirius and Severus story and JKR has said so herself. And it's that Sirius and Severus story that affected how James saw Severus. But if Snape has been a lost cause from day one, why does Dumbledore trust him now? From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 2 04:11:50 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 04:11:50 -0000 Subject: Reputations (was Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119036 > Potioncat: >From the way it was first brought up in the books, I felt it was suspect. There seems to be a hook to that part of the backstory. Whether it's that we'll find why Severus was up to his eyeballs in Dark Arts, or why he had the reputation or if it was earned...I cannot say. There is certainly more to the Sirius and Severus story and JKR has said so herself. And it's that Sirius and Severus story that affected how James saw Severus. Alla: Oh, sure we WILL find out more. (I need book 6 NOW). The reason why I think we will find out more about Severus and DA is because we DON'T KNOW much yet and in Pensieve scene he is certainly a sympathetic figure (up till he calls Lily Mudblood anyway). I believe we are due for reversal again . I could be wrong. By the way, it could be that Sirius and Severus had a backstory, but, IMO it is equally posible that James and SDeverus had a backstory. Potioncat: > But if Snape has been a lost cause from day one, why does Dumbledore trust him now? Alla: Who says that he was the lost cause? It is plausible for me that he was not AS MUCH involved with Dark Arts as Sirius thought. What I am adamant about is the truth of Sirius' general statement - that he was meddling with DA to some extent. We will see, right? You gave very good example of backstory waiting to show up - we don't know why Dumbledore trusts Snape, inf act we have no idea. I submit that we also don't know A LOT of behind the scene events leading up to Pensieve events and dare I mention.... the Prank. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 2 04:12:02 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 04:12:02 -0000 Subject: Does Viktor Krum become an important character? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119037 Ces wrote: > I don't dislike anyone who is tone-deaf, nor do I hate Krum because > he's a foreigner. I just don't like the character. And yes I do > understand some sounds are hard to pronounce in other languages. I > speak french and german and while I did have a hard time with the the > gutteral g in german, I did finally grasp it. Not as well as a > native, but I was able to maintain a conversation. > > It is Krum's character that I dislike and his not pronouncing > Hermione's name correctly is just one little thing that irritates > me. Anything Krum did in GoF managed to irritate me, just as > anything Draco Malfoy does also irritates me. I just didn't take to > that character from the beginning. Carol responds: We all have characters we don't care for or find irritating. I really dislike Dobby, and although I find Kreacher simultaneously despicable, pitiable, and entertaining, he's a bit too much like Gollum for my taste (I enjoy reading Gollum in LOTR and love the way Andy Serkis captured the character, but I don't like thinking about Gollum when I'm trying to live in the WW.) So I understand perfectly that a character can rub you the wrong way. But I'm wondering why you think Krum is not what he seems--a famous athlete who is in all other respects an ordinary and very shy schoolboy with few social skills? He seems to genuinely like Hermione and to respect his opponents, especially Harry. It's not his fault that Crouch!Moody Imperio'd him and made him Crucio Cedric. He seems ashamed of that action, as if it were his own doing, and seems surprised to be welcomed back to Hogwarts. But how is it his fault? I don't suppose he's been taught to resist an Imperius Curse though he's probably been taught to cast one. That's where *my* problem with Krum arises. He's a Durmstrang student and has therefore been taught the Dark Arts. Does that include the Unforgiveable Curses? And if he's been taught to cast them (he didn't have any trouble casting a Crucio under the Imperius Curse) does that mean he's used them on other people? Surely not. Even Karkaroff wouldn't teach his students to torture and kill each other. That would be suicidal. How do they practice the Unforgiveables, then? Do they cast them at dummies or mirrors or targets? And do they Imperio each other? (Is that the way the DEs learn them, too?) So much of it is mental--you have to really want to hurt someone to cast an effective Cruciatus Curse. You have to be a cold manipulator to cast an effective Imperius Curse. And you have to either hate deeply or be wholly indifferent to human life to cast an AK. At least that's the way I understand it. It's the mindset required as much as the effects of those curses that makes them Unforgiveable. I like Viktor Krum and I admire him for not letting the girls who follow him around go to his head. (He probably knows that if he weren't a Quidditch champion, they wouldn't give him a second glance.) But I worry about him. He's been taught the Dark Arts, apparently including the Unforgiveables. He was Karkaroff's favorite boy, and we know what Karkaroff is or was. Is it safe to have Viktor on the good side? Carol From azriona at juno.com Thu Dec 2 04:24:53 2004 From: azriona at juno.com (Sharon) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 04:24:53 -0000 Subject: The Darkness Within In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119038 > > azriona wrote: > > > By taking Harry's blood at that point, > > and bringing Voldy back to power, he managed something quite > > incredible - he rendered Voldy mortal. > > > > > > Carol responds: > > > We've already discussed why DD didn't try to kill LV at the MoM, > but if LV is mortal, *couldn't* DD have killed him, Prophecy or no > Prophecy? > > > > Valky: > I think DD said he *could* kill him but that it would not be > satisfactory. Satisfactory to DD's ego or satisfactory to the Prophecy itself? > Carol: > > Either A) the Prophecy is wrong (or being wrongly interpreted by > DD, Harry, and most readers) > > Valky: > I don't think DD is interpreting it wrongly. I've always been suspicious of DD's assurance that he knows exactly what the Prophecy means. (Either of them, actually.) They're too vaguely worded and could have too many meanings. For any one person to say "This bit means *this* and that's all there is to it and I won't hear any arguments" seems to be extremely close-minded to me. I wonder that DD in the MoM when he wouldn't kill Voldy wasn't just him trying to live up to what he perceived to be the terms of the Prophecy. He didn't try to kill Voldy because he *believed* that it was not him who was supposed to do it, or even that he would be able to do so. Therefore, why bother trying? Dumbledore's logic has always seemed a bit faulty in this regard, at least it has to me! But then...I still think that Neville might have been the one mentioned in the Prophecy, and that Trevor is the HPB, so there you are. --azriona, who doesn't live in Arizona any longer, but grew up in Yuma From azriona at juno.com Thu Dec 2 04:30:06 2004 From: azriona at juno.com (Sharon) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 04:30:06 -0000 Subject: The silver hand (Was: The Darkness Within) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119039 > Carol responds: > Speaking of the silver hand, wasn't it just conjured out of thin air? > Has anyone considered the possibility that it might just evaporate > after a few hours or days like Leprechaun gold? We haven't seen Peter > at all since the graveyard scene in GoF where he was so grateful for > the beautiful and powerful ne hand. Might that be the reason? > And yet it seems like a waste of an interesting plot device to get rid > of it so easily, especially given the connection between silver and > werewolves. Does anyone have any ideas how JKR could get around the > problem of a conjured object being transient? Or will I have to just > accept it as another Flint because the hand is too important to the > plot to have it follow the magical "laws" that JKR herself has > established? > I doubt that the hand will disappear. Voldy is supposed to be super strong, magically speaking; I wouldn't put it past him to be able to create an object out of thin air that won't dissipate as rapidly as the picnic tables and whatnot that Bill Weasley charms out of nothing in CoS. Besides, you're right - it's too good a plot device to let go! > Carol, who thinks that if there's a conflict between Pettigrew and > werewolf!Lupin, Pettigrew will win Sadly, yes. And if Peter is the one to do Remus in, I am going to be extremely put out. --azriona From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 2 04:35:46 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 04:35:46 -0000 Subject: Hogwarts letters Re: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119040 > barmaid now: > > I do think a Muggleborn magical person... if forced for some reason > back into the MW would be able to survive... I think it would be much > harder for a Muggleborn magical person who had not been exposed to > the WW, who found themselves suddenly thrust into the WW as an adult, > to cope. I think the Muggleborn magical person who has gone to > Hogwarts has more options in adult life, not less. Carol responds: As I indicated in another post (not knowing that other posters had said much the same thing because the post I responded to didn't show all the threads) I think it would be extremely difficult to get a college education, much less a job that required one, based on the Hogwarts curriculum. And the types of jobs available to non-college-educated Muggles would also be available in the WW and could be performed using magical aids of some kind. Would you rather drive the Knight bus or the Oxford tube (which BTW, is a bus, as I learned to my surprise when I traveled from London to Oxford in 1995)? Even Tom the innkeeper can use magic to light a fire. But consider the plight of a Squib. Live in the WW and take a menial job like Filch because you can't do magic, or live in the MW like Mrs. Figg and pass as a Muggle? At least they have their cats, and Mrs. Figg is a member of the Order. But a Muggle-born would have the choice to practice magic or give it up. It would take a lot--true love of a Muggle who *can't* live in the WW, most likely, to give up the excitement of the WW--but for the Squib, there would be no choice but to watch others using magic or pretend it doesn't exist. I call that a hard choice, and a sad one. Carol, who thinks that any eleven-year-old Muggleborn who *wanted* to go to Hogwarts would hate her parents forever if they deprived her of her one chance to go to "magic school" From azriona at juno.com Thu Dec 2 04:36:07 2004 From: azriona at juno.com (Sharon) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 04:36:07 -0000 Subject: Lupin's character arc (was: Character Arcs) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119041 > Alla: > Oh, and the other fond dream of mine - if Remus survives , maybe he > will be cured at the end. Maybe Snape will cure him, it will make > him famous and he will get off Harry's back? :o) > > OK, the last sentence was pretty out there, I admit. :) Perhaps it's just a bit esoteric (I think that's the word), but even if a cure existed - would Remus accept it? He's lived so much of his life as a werewolf - I doubt he remembers what it would be like to see the full moon through human eyes - and it has been so much a defining part of him - would he want to give that up? I mean, for all that he says that he has found it difficult to find paid work because of his lycanthropy and all that - he never once really expresses regret or bitterness over his condition. I kind of think that he's embraced his inner wolf, so to speak, and is very happy with himself as he is. --azriona From stonehenge.orders at verizon.net Thu Dec 2 04:45:15 2004 From: stonehenge.orders at verizon.net (kjirstem) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 04:45:15 -0000 Subject: Another Flint? (Was: When?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119042 > Carol: > The fact that Colin was one of the basilisk's victims also seems to > confirm that he really is Muggle-born. kjirstem: I thought the basilisk in COS was being directed by Possessed!Ginny, not selecting its targets independently. (COS, Ch 17, in Tom Riddle's gloating to Harry.) In FBAWTFT the entry for Basilisk indicates that they are dangerous to anyone except a Parselmouth, so it isn't that they somehow sense Muggle-borns. Colin was attacked because he was thought to be Muggle-born; the attack isn't proof that he actually is Muggle-born. From foxmoth at qnet.com Thu Dec 2 04:54:24 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 04:54:24 -0000 Subject: Slytherin House again. Was: Re: Problem with OotP? (was: Pampering) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119043 > > Carol responds: > > Neither am I. and the Sorting Hat, which seems to have a conscience,probably wouldn't put children in Slytherin if it thought that placement would make them evil. > > Alla: > > The question is why then? We are trying to find compelling reason for the existence of Slytherin House and honestly, I don't see one right now. It is a given that majority of Slytherin students becomes DE. Not only Slytherins become DE, but Slytherins do. Pippin: Whoa! There are somewhere between 70 and 250 Slytherins enroled at Hogwarts, and we know of less than ten who became DE's. That's hardly a majority. If, as JKR has said, children are basically good unless they are very damaged, then there is nothing inherently evil about the Slytherin children. Their moral development suffers because the notion that magical races are inherently noble discourages them from thinking they need moral guidance, especially from 'lesser' types. The Slytherins are there, IMO, so JKR can demonstrate why, if children are basically good, they *need* moral guidance -- because those damaged individuals like Voldemort will otherwise lead them astray. On the WW level, they are there because the Slytherin parents wouldn't have it any other way. Alla: > There should be a reason why the House with racist ideology exists for 1000 years.< Pippin: Binns says that Slytherin thought magical learning should be kept in all magical families. He didn't say all *wizard* families...it could be that Slytherin was actually more open to half-breeds, provided their ancestors on both sides were magical, than the other founders were. Harry thinks some Slytherins look like they are part troll, and there is a joke about Goyle being a troll in FBAWTFT. Pippin From golden_faile at yahoo.com Thu Dec 2 05:10:39 2004 From: golden_faile at yahoo.com (golden_faile) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 05:10:39 -0000 Subject: The Darkness Within In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119044 I'm just jumping in here (don't shoot me if this has already been discussed) Maybe it's that since some of Voldemort's powers were transferred to Harry, Harry has the right combination of powers and or protections to be able to contend w/ Lord V? If perhaps Harry was to die, but transfer those powers, the next wizard would also possess the same power and be able to kill Lord V--- It doesn't make him Immortal--- just like a combination lock, with the right combination anyone could use it, or in Lord V's case, anyone could kill him. In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > azriona wrote: > > Except what could Peter have done in that instance? Had he > set Harry free, Voldy would have killed him and used another wizard's > blood to bring himself back. By taking Harry's blood at that point, > and bringing Voldy back to power, he managed something quite > incredible - he rendered Voldy mortal. > > > Carol responds: > I have a problem here--not with azrionas's argument, which I agree > with, but with the idea that Voldy is now mortal. He himself has said > that he will settle, temporarily, for having his body back and not yet > seek immortality, but if he's mortal, why can only Harry destroy him? > > We've already discussed why DD didn't try to kill LV at the MoM, but > if LV is mortal, *couldn't* DD have killed him, Prophecy or no Prophecy? > > Either A) the Prophecy is wrong (or being wrongly interpreted by DD, > Harry, and most readers) or B) LV is wrong about his own mortality: > he's immortal with the exception of an Achilles heel named Harry Potter. > > Can anyone think of a third possibility (C)) that will make sense of > this apparent contradiction? How can Voldy be mortal and still be > killable only by Harry? > > Carol in Tucson, wondering if azriona also lives in Azriona, erm, Arizona From golden_faile at yahoo.com Thu Dec 2 05:22:32 2004 From: golden_faile at yahoo.com (golden_faile) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 05:22:32 -0000 Subject: Snape/Occlumency again (Was: Does Viktor Krum become an important In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119045 The thing that is being forgotten when dealing with Harry ( and I hope Dumbledore gets this now) is that Harry is not used to going to adults for help. So in order to get him to cooperate or understand, he NEEDS to be clued in on what is going on. He is never going to just blidly follow directions and it is going to be damn hard to teach him that way. Snape is definitely not the one for the job brcause he enjoys having the upper hand and will never give Harry more information than what HE feels Harry needs to know,due to what he sees as Harry being arrogant. --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > > OTOH, if he *does* need to use Occlumency in facing his most hated > enemy, what better way to practice than to confront *Snape* attempting > to invade his mind? I don't think Harry really "got" it before when > Snape said, "You are handing me weapons." Now, surely, he would > understand--and do what he was told. > > Carol From foxmoth at qnet.com Thu Dec 2 05:26:43 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 05:26:43 -0000 Subject: Character Arcs (was: Trusting characters) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119046 > > Pippin: > > > So far none of us have been all that great at guessing what JKR is going to do with her characters, not that it's ever stopped me. I was amused that Kneasy put Pettigrew at 50/50 but Lupin at 90/10 -- surely these two should affect one another? If Pettigrew is going to choose good after all, then another Marauder needs to choose bad. > > > James and Sirius are out of the running, pace Kneasy, as neither of them is available to be fed to the dementors. If Peter escapes, then I'm afraid Lupin is doomed. > > > Renee: > I fail to see the logic in this. Even if Peter is redeemed in the end - and I actually hope he will be - he still went bad in the first Voldemort war. But more to the point, it's no law that one of the four Marauders has to end up irredeemably evil at the end of the series, or that if another character will be fed to the Dementors, it has to be a remaining Marauder. < Pippin: It's the logic of Nemesis. The dementor's kiss is "the fate that awaits Sirius Black." --PoA ch 12 Harry thought that the one who betrayed his parents deserved it. He was willing to hand Peter over to them, thinking that Peter was the archtraitor. Peter has escaped--but that's temporary. This is the equivalent of Chekov's duelling pistols -- they've been hung on the wall in Book Three and they're bound to be used in Book Seven. The dementors have not faded into the background of the story like the acromantulas or the basilisk. JKR must have some purpose in keeping their horror before the readers minds, though Harry has already fought off the whole pack of them. > > Pippin: > > As you say, if Lupin isn't evil, then JKR has run out of things to do with him, and I don't think she has. That detachment of his has to be trouble. "Indifference and neglect often do much more damage than outright dislike..." said Dumbledore. That has to play out. > > Renee: > Very well possible. Lupin certainly seems capable of messing up things (again) by an act of omission. But JKR could also have him overcome his flaws instead and turn him into a better werewolf. And maybe he'll take over Snape's Occlumency lessons :) Pippin: That would be very nice if the books were titled Remus Lupin and...but they're not. Lupin's detachment has to put Harry in jeopardy, just as the flaws of all the other characters do -- otherwise why should we care about it? > Renee: > Detachment seems more in character for Lupin than fierce hatred. But as he doesn't always succesfully hide his feelings - occasionally, Harry registers something - we can assume he's not really devoid of emotions.< Pippin: No, indeed. Voldemort is incapable of love, but Lupin isn't -- he chooses to be detached, because otherwise he would have to put himself at risk, and he's too cowardly, IMO, to do it. Pippin From stonehenge.orders at verizon.net Thu Dec 2 05:29:30 2004 From: stonehenge.orders at verizon.net (kjirstem) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 05:29:30 -0000 Subject: Hogwarts letters Re: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119047 > > Finwitch: > > > I know what they could be: Magicians. > > > And for the rest, well... A chemist? (not so different from > Potions > > > or Alchemy, actually Chemistry developed from Alchemy). > > > An astronomer? (They DO teach astronomy at Hogwarts!) > > > 'Pseudo'-meedio, with the help of Divination? > > > And nothing to keep you from writing fantasy stories about WW, > is > > > there? > > > > > > SSSusan: > > It seems to me there are many options: > > run a business > > practice law [though providing a school transcript in order to > > get into law school could be tricky...] > > establish a manufacturing plant or just work in one > > be a carpenter or other manual laborer > > be an ice cream man [Rupert Grint's personal favorite :-)] > > farm > > work in sales or customer service > > teach > > do research for a drug company > > run a post office which surreptitiously provides WW mail service, > > too > > be a clerical worker > > > > Dungrollin: > > I agree 100% with SSSusan. Postman, milkman, dustman, salesman, > supermarket checkout thingy, shopkeeper, call centre worker, porter, > caretaker, bus driver, train driver, hotel receptionist, cleaner, > long-haul lorry driver... Not to mention all those jobs that give > you training in themselves: policeman, fireman, paramedic, > hairdresser, chef, baker, builder, and so on... > > A Muggle university education may well be out for Hogwarts grads, > but come off it! Lacking a university education does not mean you > have no place in society! Honestly... > kjirstem: And I'll add to that list (even though I'm arguing the other side of this...) painter, potter(!), artists & artisans of many kinds, child care worker, amusement park ride operator... I'm sure it goes on and on. But, it is one thing to be able to do a job and another thing to get paid to do a job. Many of the jobs listed in the posts above have some entrance requirements that might be pretty difficult to get around coming out of Hogwarts. Probably the best bet would be a job with a family member, nepotism can overcome a lot of missing background. Still, these days lots of those jobs require some use of electronic equipment - which I thought was prone to malfunction around magic. Maybe it is only the concentration of magic at Hogwarts that makes this true there...not sure I'd trust a wizard with a computer though. kjirstem - who wonders what branch of magic creates magical devices like those on Dumbledore's desk and the time-turner From pjarrett at gmail.com Wed Dec 1 23:48:13 2004 From: pjarrett at gmail.com (Patrick Jarrett) Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 18:48:13 -0500 Subject: A Theory of Rooms Message-ID: <3def328f0412011548bd2af50@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119048 Howdy all, I'm a newcomer to the list so be gentle. I checked the archives but I couldn't find anything about this so I'm hoping it leads to some good discussion, new to all of us. This theory is built heavily on other theories, a theory supported by theories deserves to be rickety but I'm curious what you all have to say. In CoS (look! Brand new and using the slang already) we are introduced to Salazar Slytherin's Chamber of Secrets, which can only be entered by a Parselmouth in the girl's bathroom. (a side note, did it bother anyone else he did it in the girl's bathroom? He's a guy?). It's a powerful room for his secret plans and uses, a big player in the long run of Harry's story. Then, according to the Wizard cards, Rowena Ravenclaw is credited with the continually changing floorplan (the HPLex notes it here: http://www.hp-lexicon.org/wizards/founders.html). While the floorplan is only a supporting effect (unlike the CoS), and not affecting the evolution of the story directly, it has been prevalent in both the books and movies. In OoP we are introduced to the Room of Requirement. Now, I have no canon to back this up, it was simply something that hopped into my mind. I am wondering if the Room of Requirement was created by one of the other founders? Which would then lead me to believe that there might be another rooms created by the founder. Now, stay with me, this is a stretch but I think it might have merit. The Room of Requirement always struck me as the sort of thing Helga Hufflepuff would come up with. This is based on what we know of Hufflepuff student personalities and thus judging how Helga Hufflepuff acted. It's a room dedicated to fulfilling a dire need for someone. DD when he needs to find a bathroom. The twins when they need to avoid Filch. Harry when they need a DA meeting location. If we think of each of the above, Room of Req., floorplan, and CoS, as a major contribution to the school, and do attribute the Room of Req. to Helga, then the only person not represented is Godric. Without any support (still), I am of the belief that Godric was the first Headmaster of Hogwarts. I believe this because he was of the belief that any who showed ability with magic should be allowed to attend the school. And thus under his direction the school would allow the most new students. As a fledgling school, this is very important. If he was the first Headmaster, then it would follow logically that he created the Headmaster's room. And going by the other three, the Headmaster's room still has a good deal to show us. So, let me know what you think. If I'm right, could we see the Headmaster's hall play a larger part in the coming books? Or have I misattributed a room to someone? Maybe ignored a room which should be attributed? It's something which I've been chewing over for a few days now, now chew me over ;) -- Patrick From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 2 06:02:55 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 06:02:55 -0000 Subject: Did Snape work for Dumbledore from Day One? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119049 Carol: Fascinating post, azriona! Your theory of Snape as DD's spy all along is intriguing and fits nicely with Puppetmaster!DD, but for reasons I've explained all too often on this list, I still think Snape is the one who will not return. Barty Jr. is clearly the loyal servant and Karkaroff, who fled rather than stayed, is clearly the coward. For now, I just want to focus on this one idea: > azriona: > [Dumbledore] seems to be the only one to > trust Severus Snape ? after all, most people in the wizarding world > still see him as an ex-Death Eater. No matter that he was a spy, no > one seems to think that Snape can be trusted. > > In GoF Chp 30: > "'Snape has been cleared by this council, said Crouch > disdainfully. 'He has been vouched for by Albus Dumbledore.'" > "Harry turned to look at Mad-Eye Moody. He was wearing a look of deep skepticism behind Dumbledore's back." > > Here, we learn that Dumbledore gave sufficient proof to the > Wizengamot to clear Snape of the charges against him as a Death > Eater ? however, it's obvious that Crouch doesn't believe it, and in > fact may be somewhat annoyed by Snape's release. Moody more than > likely feels the same way, judging from the expression on his face. In fact, Moody may not just feel that Snape could still harbor > sympathy for the Death Eaters and their cause ? he may not agree with Dumbledore's decision to use Snape as a spy in the first place. > Carol responds: I read this scene differently. First, there's no evidence that anyone beyond "this council"--the Wizengamot, the same people who are present for Karkaroff's hearing, knows that Snape is an ex-DE. *Crouch!Moody* knows, of course, and has his own reasons for resenting him, and the real Moody knows and has his doubts, I agree, but there's no indication that it's common knowledge in the WW at large. Unlike Malfoy, Crabbe, Goyle, Nott, Rookwood, and Avery, his name was not published in the papers. Bear in mind that he was still spying for dumbledore at the time of Karkaroff's hearing "at great personal risk." He would have been murdered by the DEs or Voldemort himself if word had gotten out. And it's most unlikely that non-Slytherin parents would want their children taught by an ex-DE. As for Crouch Sr., you're saying that he doesn't believe that Snape has been cleared, but his disdain is aimed at Karkaroff, not at Snape. what he actually says is, "Snape has been cleared by *this council,*" i.e., by *us,* by the very people who are sitting here. So no one new (except Harry) is learning about Snape's past at this hearing. Crouch had heard Dumbledore's earlier testimony and had evidently been persuaded to drop all charges. Karkaroff assures him that Snape *was* a DE. Dumbledore then has to explain that Snape became a spy before Voldemort fell and "is now no more a Death Eater than I am." Moody scoffs but Karkaroff is silenced and Crouch says nothing more on the matter. Evidently the council members remain silent on the matter as before, knowing Snape's danger even though most of the DEs are in Azkaban and Voldemort has vanished. Dumbledore, as you note, tells Harry that Snape has "never been accused of any Dark activity since," and there's no indication that anyone outside the Wizengamot knows he was ever charged. Sirius doesn't know (in GoF) that Snape was a DE; Fudge seems not to know, either, and gasps in horror when Snape shows him the Dark Mark. I agree completely that Snape values Dumbledore's trust, but not because DD is the only person in the WW who trusts him. And I agree that there's a bond between them, evidenced most clearly by the few words and looks exchanged between them when Dumbledore sends Snape on his dangerous mission and remains silent for several minutes afterwards. Carol, whose mouse wants to highlight the whole post instead of a paragraph and is about to find itself turned into a toadstool if it doesn't start behaving From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Wed Dec 1 17:23:52 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 09:23:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: Slytherin (was Re: Problem with OotP?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041201172352.79422.qmail@web53108.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119050 Juli earlier: > I don't think just because someone is Slytherin he/she is evil, there are good Slytherins, like Snape (I just love him), and Phineas Nigellus. Renee replied: > Was Phineas Nigellus reallyu a `good Slytherin'? He's called the worst Headmaster of Hogwarts ever. Isn't he (or his portrait) honour-bound to help the present Headmaster? What would he do if he wasn't? Juli again: Phineas may not have been the best Headmaster (actually he was the worst, according to Sirius), but does it mean he was evil? No, why would the WW allow a evil dark lord to teach their offspring? I don't know what year was it, but unless the world was mostly evil back then, the MoM would never let an evil wizard be Headmaster at Hogwarts. By the way, I think Phineas is really cool, the way he tells Fudge that he may not always agree with DD, but you can't deny he's got class. I just loved that. Juli From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Thu Dec 2 01:46:04 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 17:46:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: OOP: The unknown power In-Reply-To: <20041202010023.GC60854@prophecy.dyndns.org> Message-ID: <20041202014604.70895.qmail@web53104.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119051 > Ignatia_wildfire wrote: > > I think it was obvious from the way Dumbledore > > spoke - I believe the power Harry has that > > Voldemort will never have is LOVE... > Christopher replied: > I've said this before, and I'll say it again: I > really, really hope not. If that were so, it > would make the series fake, Disneylike, cartoonish, > trite, cliche, and so forth. Now here I go-Juli-: I have to agree with Christopher, I'd hate if this power turned out to be love, it's just tacky and corny, like a children story, say Cinderella, The 3 Little Bears and so many others. I know HP is a children's book and everything, but I think they're beyond that. Juli From elanorpam at yahoo.com.br Wed Dec 1 22:10:51 2004 From: elanorpam at yahoo.com.br (Paula "Elanor Pam") Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 20:10:51 -0200 Subject: ghosts, magicians and babies was Re: Questions References: <200412011137211.SM01064@devbox> Message-ID: <009001c4d7f2$a20f5db0$0301010a@home> No: HPFGUIDX 119052 Potioncat: > A bigger question I think is why the Fat Friar, of all people, would be afraid to go on to the Hereafter. Vivamus: > Think about it this way. If you were a member of a religious order that believed there was eternal punishment for those that did not fulfill the larger requirements of the hereafter, and a very long but temporary punishment for those that fulfilled the larger requirements but had neglected the required disciplines of daily living, and you had spent a lifetime indulging rather than abstaining, wouldn't you be hesitant? Elanor Pam: Something just came to my mind. The Fat Friar was a friar - but he was also a wizard (well, he's HufflePuff's ghost, so I assume he was). And you know the problem the church had with wizards and witches, all that burning thing, right? So maybe he was afraid of dying because he'd be "punished" for the "sin" of being a wizard? Dah... I don't think I'm conveying that well. You understand what I mean, right? Elanor Pam From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Thu Dec 2 04:45:48 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 20:45:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Lupin's character arc (was: Character Arcs) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041202044548.18334.qmail@web53103.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119053 Sharon/azriona wrote: ...edited. > I mean, for all that he says that he has found it > difficult to find > paid work because of his lycanthropy and all that - > he never once > really expresses regret or bitterness over his > condition. I kind of > think that he's embraced his inner wolf, so to > speak, and is very > happy with himself as he is. Juli now: I don't think Remus is particularly happy with his werewolf condition, he's just accepted it, he's been a werewolf most of his life, it's just who he is, but I think we wouldn't doubt it for a second to leave his lycanthropy (is that even a word?) behind, it's just too much to handle. Juli __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From kjones at telus.net Thu Dec 2 00:09:19 2004 From: kjones at telus.net (Kathryn Jones) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 16:09:19 -0800 Subject: Why not ask Hagrid Message-ID: <41AE5D2F.70704@telus.net> No: HPFGUIDX 119054 Kathy writes: I checked the archives for writings on Hagrid and there was very little there. Hagrid tends to get glossed over somehow. He is always there like a "best supporting" but without being particularly noticed. 1. He was at school with Riddle. It was Riddle's doing that got Hagrid expelled. 2. He was still at Hogwarts after his expulsion because his father had died previously and Dumbledore kept him on. So he was there for the rest of Riddle's school years. 3. Hagrid was in the original Order of the Phoenix so he would have been privy to most of the information. 4. Hagrid knew all about Harry's parents. Knew them personally at school and as adults. 5. Hagrid was at Hogwarts all through the Marauders days and knew Snape as a student as well. In PS/SS Hagrid denies that Snape hates Harry but can not meet his eyes. He obviously knows that Snape hates Harry, and why, and it would appear obvious that this has recently been discussed. 6. In PS/SS at the time of V's fall, they had already been fighting him for eleven years. 7. Hagrid knows something about Snape that causes him to "hotly" deny that Snape would hurt a student and he was confident that Snape was not after the stone. 8. Hagrid could probably shed some light on why everyone was satisfied at the time that Sirius was the spy. He would also have known about Lupin. I wonder if Hagrid will have a much greater effect on the situation in the next two books. KJ From pjarrett at gmail.com Thu Dec 2 03:42:32 2004 From: pjarrett at gmail.com (Patrick Jarrett) Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 22:42:32 -0500 Subject: Reputations (was Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3def328f041201194243568738@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119055 > Valky: > I would just like to go on record here saying that I, also, do not > think that the bullying is justified by the principles that may or > may not be underlying in part (or all) of the cause. > I initially took up the gauntlet on James behalf because I found > it difficult to accept that the Hero!James that saved Severus in > the later year had an icy cold heart in fifth year, in spite of his > reprehensible behaviour. Being a rather large child I learned early on that bullying came in many forms and since I was already taller than most kids, I had to be extra careful. I got in one fight in school, the kid pushed me too far, I hit him and he hit the floor. Something I'll never forget. But this kid was a total punk, a brat at the age of fifteen. I regret hitting him and missing the week of school, but there was an obvious effect on him as he found out that his antics could have repercussions. As did I. Snape came into school knowing spells some 7th years didn't know (or is it knowing some spells 7th years didn't know...) and so he would equate to not only the muggle geek who got picked on, but a dangerous geek who, perhaps in James' mind needed to be brought down a notch. Until we get more background no one can say really, but it is something to think about. Regardless there was undoubtedly a better way to go about it. But also keep in mind, no matter how mature they are, they're still kids. -- Patrick From harriet_lupin at yahoo.com Thu Dec 2 02:03:26 2004 From: harriet_lupin at yahoo.com (Marianne Adams) Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 18:03:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: "Prince" in HBP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041202020326.87293.qmail@web51404.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119056 doddiemoemoe wrote: > At this time, I simply cannot think of anyone JKR has given enough > background on that may be the HBP.. I don't mean to jump in out of sequence but I can't find the end of this thread.... but can I suggest the HBP could be Lupin? He is a half-blood I believe. Harriet From gbannister10 at aol.com Thu Dec 2 07:55:19 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 07:55:19 -0000 Subject: "The Great Humberto" was: Questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119057 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "hermionekitten9" wrote: > > Geoff: I do not think that he would be a wrestler or something akin > to that because Dudley was expecting to see him on a Monday night > and I don't recall TV schedules including things like wrestling > during the week. That would be fare for the wall-to-wall sports > coverage on a > Saturday... > > Kitten: I don't know Smackdown, a high rating wrestling > show, is on regularly Thursday nights where I'm from (I have an > 12 year old nephew who watches I don't-g-) and I don't > ever recall a magician having a tv show whether it be Monday, > Wednesday, Friday, or Sunday nor can I imagine Dudley wanting to > watch a magic show on tv I can, on the other hand, imagine him > watching a wrestling show. Geoff: Two thoughts: (1) Are you speaking from a US perspective and (2) are you looking at satellite or terrestrial programmes? Remember that we are considering 1991. IIRC, satellite programmes were very much in their infancy then - in fact were they available? My comment re schedules was looking at the current UK terrestrial TV scene where, as I said, major sport is on Saturdays. Weekdays would see very big events such as World Cup football, Olympics, cricket etc. > Geoff: I think Vernon would be able to differentiate between someone > such as a stage magician whom he would consider to be a fake, using > legerdemain and deception to produce their results as opposed to > genuine members of the Wizarding World. After all, the neighbours > would probably watch the Great Humbrto with the same measure of > suspended disbelief as the Dursleys, wouldn't they? Kitten: this is an interesting point, Would Vernon and Petunia let > Dudley watch a magic tv Show? One would think-g- but Vernon and > family freaked out when Harry told Dudley to say the "magic" > word, in CoS, so I don't see them being able to differentiate > between the two. Geoff: Possibly because it was /Harry/ who used the M-word and they are very sensitive to his use of vocabulary. I think that if darling Duddykins wanted to see a TV conjurer, they'd let him; after all, Harry could safely be hung on a peg with the coats in the hall cupboard by then. :-) From finwitch at yahoo.com Thu Dec 2 08:01:27 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 08:01:27 -0000 Subject: Reputations (was Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119058 > Alla: > > Oh, sure we WILL find out more. (I need book 6 NOW). The reason why > I think we will find out more about Severus and DA is because we > DON'T KNOW much yet and in Pensieve scene he is certainly a > sympathetic figure (up till he calls Lily Mudblood anyway). I > believe we are due for reversal again . I could be wrong. By the > way, it could be that Sirius and Severus had a backstory, but, IMO > it is equally posible that James and SDeverus had a backstory. Finwitch: How about there being both Sirius&Severus backstory AND James&Severus backstory? Hmm-mm. Sirius tells Harry that James hated Severus from the first sight as I recall. Was it like - er- Harry meeting Malfoy at Madam Malkins'? Malfoy sure wasn't *hiding* his views, was he? Maybe Severus did something like that? Said something like 'those mudbloods should not be allowed in' or something about Albus Dumbledore or James' Parents or James' hair or... The truth is, we don't know. Oh, and James' attack wasn't unwarned. That 'All right, Snivellus?' - I'd say it's a bit like: 'Is it all right with you that we fight so Sirius/Black/Padfoot won't be so bored? Practice for the practical DADA test, OK?' As SS went for his wand, he *accepted* the call for the fight/practice --- and er - if this was *practice* for DADA, well... > Alla: - we > don't know why Dumbledore trusts Snape, inf act we have no idea. Finwitch: Yes. What did Hermione say: "Dumbledore trusts him and if we can't trust Dumbledore, we can trust no one". I think there's another point, one none of the kids makes. (Though Harry may *act* it). I think Albus Dumbledore, Sirius Black etc. can indeed be trusted - to some extent - BUT I don't know if I were ready to trust anyone to tell me who to trust, that I'd trust someone just because someone else does... they all are capable of erring, after all. AND Snape may well be trustworthy to *Dumbledore* but not to Harry. (So er - if Dumbledore were to die, Snape's not to be trusted...) Finwitch From gbannister10 at aol.com Thu Dec 2 08:10:53 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 08:10:53 -0000 Subject: The silver hand (Was: The Darkness Within) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119059 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Sharon" wrote: --azriona: > I doubt that the hand will disappear. Voldy is supposed to be super > strong, magically speaking; I wouldn't put it past him to be able to > create an object out of thin air that won't dissipate as rapidly as > the picnic tables and whatnot that Bill Weasley charms out of nothing > in CoS. > Geoff: I presume that you are referring to the picnic which was in GOF, not COS (Harry doesn't meet Bill and Charlie until then). If so, we are told that they were "two battered old tables" (GOF "Weasleys' Wizard Wheezes" p.57 UK edition) and not produced for the occasion. Secondly, where does the idea come from that conjured objects are transient? There is evidence in at least two places - probably more - that objects are removed by using the spell "Evanesco". From gbannister10 at aol.com Thu Dec 2 08:18:08 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 08:18:08 -0000 Subject: OOP: The unknown power In-Reply-To: <20041202014604.70895.qmail@web53104.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119060 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Juli wrote: > > > Ignatia_wildfire wrote: > > > I think it was obvious from the way Dumbledore > > > spoke - I believe the power Harry has that > > > Voldemort will never have is LOVE... > > > Christopher replied: > > I've said this before, and I'll say it again: I > > really, really hope not. If that were so, it > > would make the series fake, Disneylike, cartoonish, > > trite, cliche, and so forth. Juli-: > I have to agree with Christopher, I'd hate if this > power turned out to be love, it's just tacky and > corny, like a children story, say Cinderella, The 3 > Little Bears and so many others. I know HP is a > children's book and everything, but I think they're > beyond that. Geoff: Depends what you mean by "love". We've had similar discussions before. If you mean sentimental sloppy love as in pop songs, which I doubt is really love, then I agree. But if the power is "agape", the deep, unselfish, sacrificial love which is at the heart of cration, then I beg to differ. It all comes back to the fact that the English word "love" is a catch all for everything from "liking" to "lust". It's a pity we can't follow the Greek and have a number of words. From bboyminn at yahoo.com Thu Dec 2 09:29:52 2004 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 09:29:52 -0000 Subject: ghosts, magicians and babies - Minor Point In-Reply-To: <200412011137211.SM01064@devbox> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119061 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Vivamus" wrote: > Vivamus: > >...edited... > > (In fact, I'll go even farther and say that I think that Neville is > by far the best candidate I've seen in the books for the HBP, even > though he is a pure blood wizard. ... > bboyminn: I like this idea; I've always been a big Neville fan, and have been saying for long long time that Neville is an extremely important character and a powerful wizard. I also like to think that there are wizards in some of the minor branches of the Royal family. I think Neville has been groomed in the background for the entire series so far. JKR is dropping signs the Neville is someone to keep your eye on, and when we finally see him at his best, I think we will all be suitably impressed. So, Neville as HBP, I'd like that. I guess maybe it's because I alway root for the underdog. > Vivamus: > ...why, exactly, the Sorting Hat puts students in different houses. > Do they go to Gryffindor because they ARE brave, or because they > WANT to be brave? The SH put Harry in Gryffindor because that was > Harry's choice. ... > ...edited... > > I am hoping we'll find out more about the sorting and the houses in > the next couple of books. > > ...edited... > > Vivamus bboyminn: This is a common misstatement, Harry didn't choose Gryffindor, he chose NOT Slytherin. I'm guessing based on statements by Ron, Hagrid, and Hermoine, Harry probably has a preference for Gryffindor, but he never had a chance to actually state that preference. Therefore the Hat could have placed him in Hufflepuff, Ravenclaw, or Gryffindor, and while the Hat saw aspects of all those houses, it put him in Gryffindor. I think Harry has demostrated in every book, and on more than one occassion per book, that he truly has the Gryffindor spirit. Setve/bboyminn (was bboy_mn) From olivier.fouquet+harry at m4x.org Thu Dec 2 09:46:17 2004 From: olivier.fouquet+harry at m4x.org (olivier.fouquet+harry at m4x.org) Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 10:46:17 +0100 Subject: Detached?Lupin Message-ID: <03A09B92-4447-11D9-8223-000A95665DE8@m4x.org> No: HPFGUIDX 119062 > I've assumed that Lupin would have to hate his former friends to > turn against them. But what if he only had to become detached? > We've certainly seen lots of examples of that in canon. All those > times he speaks "lightly" or "evenly" about things which ought to > be very upsetting, we've taken it that he's concealing his > feelings. But what if he isn't? What if he's detaching himself? > > Pippin Olivier I wasn't too convinced by that and for a good reason. In OoP, I was unable to find even one instance of Lupin speaking either lightly nor evenly. The only characters who speak lightly are Dumbledore (even when dueling Voldemort) and Georges Weasley. In PoA, Lupin speaks "lightly" twice: once when explaining Harry and Hermione why they were awarded points even though they didn't defeat the Boggart (arguably a "lightly" subject) and once to ask Harry if indeed he thinks "anyone deserves that?" (arguably not a "lightly" subject at all but Lupin is proven correct by the story). As for speaking "evenly" in PoA, that happens twice in the Shrieking Shack. "Do you think I could have a look at the rat?" and "I must admit, Peter, I have difficulty in understanding why an innocent man would want to spend twelve years as a rat". True enough, those aren't "even" subjects. However, making an argument that Lupin is detached with 3 occurences in more that a thousand pages is a bit flimsy in my opinion. Besides, in OoP, you won't have any difficulty to find numerous instances of Lupin emotionally comforting the other characters. He's doing it with Molly (praising her house-keeping, assuring her that they will take good care of her children if anything happens to her or Arthur, recognizing she has a valid point in her argument with Sirius), with Harry (encouraging him for his hearing, saving him from jumping through the veil while he himself is clearly struggling emotionally), with Hermione (discussing elves rights), with Sirius (he's the only one that tries to keep Sirius' temper down and his repeated attempt to shut down Mrs Black portrait can be read as a metaphor for the emotional support he gives Sirius in trying to overcome his childhood), with the werewolf in Arthur's cell, with Neville... So 3 ambiguous "lightly" and "evenly" (of course I may have missed some, but I don't think so) against massive evidence that Lupin do care about how other people feel. That is pretty consistent with one of the underlying theme of OoP: Harry's perceived estrangement from Dumbledore. Dumbledore's apparent lack of care is efficiently contrasted by the care of the other characters, including and in fact most prominently Lupin. Olivier From slgazit at sbcglobal.net Thu Dec 2 09:48:09 2004 From: slgazit at sbcglobal.net (slgazit) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 09:48:09 -0000 Subject: ghosts, magicians and babies - Minor Point In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119063 > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Vivamus" wrote: > > > Vivamus: > > > >...edited... > > > > (In fact, I'll go even farther and say that I think that Neville is > > by far the best candidate I've seen in the books for the HBP, even > > though he is a pure blood wizard. ... Looking at the names of the previous 5 volumes, none of the titles referred to any character or item that was introduced in a previous book (with the exception of a very cursory reference to Sirius Black in the SS). I see no reason to think that JKR will forego a winning formula, ergo the HBP will be a new character or a very minor one from previous books and, I am willing to bet, an adult. Salit From jferer at yahoo.com Thu Dec 2 10:55:25 2004 From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 10:55:25 -0000 Subject: OOP: The unknown power In-Reply-To: <20041202014604.70895.qmail@web53104.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119064 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Juli wrote: > > > Ignatia_wildfire wrote: > > > I think it was obvious from the way Dumbledore > > > spoke - I believe the power Harry has that > > > Voldemort will never have is LOVE... > > > Christopher replied: > > I've said this before, and I'll say it again: I > > really, really hope not. If that were so, it > > would make the series fake, Disneylike, cartoonish, > > trite, cliche, and so forth. > > > Now here I go-Juli-: > I have to agree with Christopher, I'd hate if this > power turned out to be love, it's just tacky and > corny, like a children story, say Cinderella, The 3 > Little Bears and so many others. I know HP is a > children's book and everything, but I think they're > beyond that. Why disappointed? That power almost certainly is love; Dumbledore's whole confession is about love, how love led him to his errors. Love is a major theme through the whole series. Harry suffers in a loveless house and then comes to Hogwarts to find friendship and a world where he is loved. Ron loves him; Hermione loves him; Dumbledore loves him. And Harry loves them all back, and more. When love is slipping in OoP Harry has his darkest time; his darkness begins to lift when he's reminded of compassion for Luna, trying to get her stuff back so she can pack. Love is much broader than we're used to thinking of it. It's the least tacky and corny force there is, much more than Lizzy McGuire having a crush on a cute boy in the hall. It's the force that keeps soldiers and firefighters looking out for each other, sometimes sacrificing themselves for the sake of everybody else. It's this force that makes this series unique, and its characters fascinating. Jim Ferer From R.Vink2 at chello.nl Thu Dec 2 11:13:09 2004 From: R.Vink2 at chello.nl (Renee) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 11:13:09 -0000 Subject: Character Arcs (was: Trusting characters) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119065 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > >> > > > Renee: > > I fail to see the logic in this. Even if Peter is redeemed in the > end - and I actually hope he will be - he still went bad in the > first Voldemort war. But more to the point, it's no law that one of > the four Marauders has to end up irredeemably evil at the end of > the series, or that if another character will be fed to the > Dementors, it has to be a remaining Marauder. < > > Pippin: > > It's the logic of Nemesis. The dementor's kiss is "the fate that > awaits Sirius Black." --PoA ch 12 Harry thought that the one who > betrayed his parents deserved it. He was willing to hand Peter > over to them, thinking that Peter was the archtraitor. Peter has > escaped--but that's temporary. This is the equivalent of Chekov's > duelling pistols -- they've been hung on the wall in Book Three > and they're bound to be used in Book Seven. Renee: Oh yes, I'm also convinced the Dementors will come into play again in Book 6 or 7, or both. Actually, they already have, in OotP, be it backstage. But while it's true that Harry was willing to hand Peter over to the Dementors, it wasn't for the Kiss. He says about Peter: `He can go to Azkaban.' And as for Harry thinking the traitor deserved the Kiss: that was in theory. In the Shrieking Shack he isn't even able to kill Sirius when he's got him in his power. In the MoM he's unable to effectively Crucio Bellatrix. I wouldn't be surprised if he will change his mind about the Kiss - if he hasn't already done so. Sirius would have received the Kiss on capture because he managed to escape from Azkaban. Another character who managed to get out of Azkaban *was* Kissed in GoF. In other words, there's no clear link between the Marauders as a group and the Dementor's Kiss, while there *is* some sort of link between it and escaping from Azkaban. As per OotP the function of the Dementors has changed; they're no longer the guards of Azkaban but have joined Voldemort's cause. Now if we're talking about Nemesis, the logical thing to happen would be that one or more of the Death Eaters who broke out in OotP with the help of the Dementors would receive the Kiss. I just hope that if it happens, it won't be Peter. > > > Renee: > Lupin certainly seems capable of messing > up things (again) by an act of omission. But JKR could also > have him overcome his flaws instead and turn him into a better > werewolf. And maybe he'll take over Snape's Occlumency > lessons :) > > Pippin: > > That would be very nice if the books were titled Remus Lupin > and...but they're not. Lupin's detachment has to put Harry in > jeopardy, just as the flaws of all the other characters do -- > otherwise why should we care about it? Renee: Lupin's flaws have already put Harry in jeopardy once. You won't hear me say it can't happen again, but if it does I'd consider it repetetive. JKR can still have Lupin doing the right thing while the focus is not on him. If he does it to support/help/save/whatever Harry, she doesn't have to rename the books. From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Thu Dec 2 11:26:12 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 11:26:12 -0000 Subject: Harry's Protection (was Re: Questions) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119066 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "M.Clifford" wrote: > > Kneasy: > > I posted (a few months back) that the 'Ancient Magic' that protects > > Harry is only effective against Voldemort > > Valky: > Yes I agree with you Kneasy, I believe the blood protection and the > surge that repelled Vernon Dursley are not the same power. The > former being the force that caused Quirrelmorts *hands to burn* and > the latter, perhaps a completely different power that the Dark Lord > knows *not*. > > Kneasy: Hum. I've been remiss in not making my thinking clear, it seems. I don't think the 'Ancient Magic' and the 'blood protection' are the same thing. I kind of get the impression you do - correct me if I'm wrong. OK. Rough outline of what I think we've got/had so far: 1. Ancient Magic: this is what blew Voldy's mind at GH, caused Quirrell to go to pieces and was nullified in the graveyard. It is/was specific against the *physical* Voldemort/Voldy!Possessed *only*. And it no longer works. Voldy can touch him. 2. Blood protection: a separate magic that protects Harry within the confines of his relative's home *only*. No clear instance of how it works, but it possibly keeps Harry safe from the attentions of DEs and other wizards who wish him ill *while he is at home*. 3. 'Automatic' wandless magic. Protects Harry from harm that might come from non-magical sources, i.e. Vernon, school gangs. May be innate in all wizards, not just Harry. Works anywhere. It may seem a comprehensive set of shielding, but there are gaps that nasty stuff can creep through, hence the Little Whinging Dementors. They were not Voldy, not attacking while he was physically in the Dursley house, and they were magical. None of the protections applied. Similarly, it should be possible for, say Bella to attack him in the street, but not while he is in the house. I believe that the blood protection is still working. Inside No. 4 Privet Drive he would still be safe from Voldy, despite the fact that the Ancient Magic has now been overcome, otherwise why keep sending him back there? > Valky: > It could well be all this that you say here Kneasy, but thats not > very exciting. ;D > Kneasy: Ah, a thrill seeker! Yearning for a roller-coaster ride to the outer reaches of BANGy theory. Don't blame you, it can be fun. > > Valky: > Yes, here is the crux of my investigation. We are given the prophecy > in OOtP and we are told that Harry has a power that the Dark Lord > does *not* know of. I expect quite some foreshadowing of this power > in action has also been given to us through the course of the series. > I am looking in only four passages and so far it is adding up. > As was quoted for me by Geoff Bannister in an earlier post, so far > all that has been thoroughly discussed by DD, Voldemort and Harry is > the *touch* of his skin bearing the protection of his mothers love. > Kneasy: Yep. That power. Something else again, I think - and separate from the various protections. Everyone wants to know what it is and how it can crunch Voldy. It must be something specific to Harry. The protections were *emplaced* and I can't see any reason why they couldn't be provided for other wizards too, particularly as the one relating to Lily's 'sacrifice' - the anti-Voldy one - has now gone. The only thing that Harry has that no-one else has is a bit of Voldy in his mind. It's the only thing that can't be replicated by DD. This is why I spent so much time whittering on about Possession. To be boring: IMO Voldy is a combination of Tom and Salazar essence/spirit, call it what you may. Harry is a combination of Harry and Voldy. If Harry can force Voldy from inside his mind, then Tom could follow his example and force Sally from his. I think Tom and Sally have a pact, probably involving power and immortality, DD knows it and that's why he keeps appealing to Tom rather than Voldy, and tells him there are worse things than death - eternal slavery, maybe. If Tom makes a break for freedom he'll probably die without the Sally life-support that keeps him going. But Sally will be reduced to what he was before he leeched onto Tom in the Chamber. Tom gets a kind of redemption through sacrificing his 'life' and Sally ends up gnashing his non-existent dentures as a weakened, non-corporate spirit that could be imprisioned/destroyed. Could be a lot of fun. Almost nobody agrees with me of course. "That Kneasy; gets strange ideas, you know. Very sad." No sympathy required: I *revel* in it. It's why I'm here. Valky: > There are two other mysteries about Harry's protection, one is the > protection of the Durselys home, and the other is the *impossible to > hold by the throat (strangle)* Harry. IMO JKR has given us almost > all that she will ever give about the home, I am sure that most will > agree that it seems that protection is wearing at the edges now and > will soon be a moot point because it will be gone. However, the > impossible to hold Harry is quite a new emergence in the series, and > Voldemort seems to know nothing about it. > Kneasy: Not quite impossible to hold by the throat. Sirius was doing quite well in trying to throttle Harry in the Shrieking Shack. It took a kick from Hermione to make him let go. There was no magical protection. This backs up my contention re: the Ancient Magic being anti-Voldy only and automatic magic being Muggle world protection only. By splitting the protection into various specificities JKR has enlarged the playground. One comprehensive protection would be a bit boring IMO. It would make Harry too safe - certainly for my tastes. But it still doesn't explain why DD was so pleased. In fact I've posited that removal of the anti-Voldy spell has made Harry a lot more vulnerable. It's removed any restraints on that bit in his mind. It's why he was so open to Voldy thoughts and images in OoP, it's why he seems such an unpleasant character in OoP. The Voldy influence is growing from the inside. It'll be interesting to see how Harry and DD deal with it. From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Thu Dec 2 11:43:43 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 11:43:43 -0000 Subject: Trusting characters Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119067 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > I more or less agree with this list (except for Harry, who as the heor > will do the right thing, whatever it is, at the end of Book 7). > Kneasy: That's as maybe. But in the meantime, while that Voldy fragment is there he can't be trusted. He's open to outside influence - just as he was with Sirius. Carol: > What about the other Weasleys, Kneasy? I would add the Twins to the > "trust" list, with poor Percy as a "maybe," though I think he'll come > around eventually, perhaps after losing a family member. And probably > Bill and Charlie are good guys as well, with Bill slightly iffier than > Charlie. > Kneasy: Didn't list 'em because they've played comparatively minor roles so far. Besides, there's going to be a Weasley cull; my bet is that three of 'em won't see the end of the series. Why else have so many if not to provide curse fodder? Probably Charlie, one of the twins and either Percy or Ginny. Ginny would be nice and BANGy. Don't see why future deaths should be confined to male goodies only. Let's go for a bit of gender equality. Sorry Ginny; you're it. From willsonkmom at msn.com Thu Dec 2 12:27:00 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 12:27:00 -0000 Subject: Fat Friar (was ghosts, magicians and babies was Re: Questions In-Reply-To: <009001c4d7f2$a20f5db0$0301010a@home> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119068 >>> Elanor Pam: > > Something just came to my mind. The Fat Friar was a friar - but he was also a wizard (well, he's HufflePuff's ghost, so I assume he was). snip So maybe he was afraid of dying because he'd be "punished" for the > "sin" of being a wizard? snip > Potioncat: The same thought came to me, and then it dawned on me. How did he become both? According to JKR the ghosts were in the house they now haunt. If FF was at Hogwarts from 11--17, when did he go to the monestary? (I have only the vaguest idea of how a friar trained to be a friar.) From MadameSSnape at aol.com Thu Dec 2 12:57:09 2004 From: MadameSSnape at aol.com (MadameSSnape at aol.com) Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 07:57:09 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Slytherin House again. Was: Re: Problem with OotP? (was: ... Message-ID: <12f.51941e7d.2ee06b25@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119069 In a message dated 12/1/2004 10:35:12 PM Eastern Standard Time, dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com writes: It is a given that majority of Slytherin students becomes DE. ======= Sherrie here: IS it a given? Where in canon is that stated? The only statement we have that I can recall is Hagrid's in PS/SS - "There's not a witch or wizard..." (Sorry, I'm about 6 hours away from my books, getting ready to take a licensing test as a guide in Gettysburg!) Hagrid is given somewhat to hyperbole - not to mention that it was a Slytherin that got him bounced out of school on his bum, so he's a tad biased. Not only that - but his statement is NOT that they all became DEs, but that they "went bad" - not necessarily one and the same thing. While I accept the converse - that the majority of DEs are Slytherins (although we really have no canon evidence even for that), I'm not sure I agree that the majority of Slyths become DEs. (Frankly, if I were Voldemort, I'm not sure I'd WANT a lot of Slytherins around me...they wouldn't make the most reliable servants!) :-D Sherrie (who REALLY should be cramming...) Sherrie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From Vivamus at TaprootTech.com Thu Dec 2 13:08:00 2004 From: Vivamus at TaprootTech.com (Vivamus) Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 08:08:00 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Hermione's Time Turner In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200412020808152.SM01064@devbox> No: HPFGUIDX 119070 > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Vivamus" wrote: > > > Vivamus wrote: > > > > > > > > > > I'm pretty sure we haven't seen the end of time travel, > though. Remember the Quidditch World Cup? Fred and George bet > everything they had on a hundred to one shot, with complete > confidence, and no indication of surprise that they had won. > Somehow, they *knew.* > > snip> > > > > > > > Carol responds: > > > I've addressed this before, so apologies to anyone who > already knows > > > my views. IMO, it's extremely unlikely that the twins had a time > > > turner. They seem to be rare items and highly regulated. All it > > > took, really, to win that bet was brains and the Twins' usual > > > creative approach to everything. > > > > > > They knew that Krum was the best Seeker in the world, > therefore he > > > would catch the Snitch; they also knew that Ireland had the best > > > *team* in the world, therefore they would > win the match. > > > Vivamus again: > > I think we'll have to disagree on the Weasley twins, though. > While your analysis of what they might have done is certainly > reasonable, and certainly within their abilities, they expressed a > confidence, both in their attitude and it betting everything > > they had, that suggested to me that they weren't guessing. > > Valky: > Very interesting argument Vivamus, and although Carol, your > reasoning is sharp and highly logical, I wonder just how far this > investigation really has gone. > I mean, has anyone, for example, referenced GOF for the moment that > the twins actually first appeared at the Burrow on the day of the > QWC. If they had time turned I am sure there would be some kind of > hint of them appearing to be in two places at once. I don't have GOF > here at the moment, and Oh I am missing it right now with all this > interesting conversation going on, perhaps I need a second copy. Vivamus: Actually, I *don't* think they used a time turner. I think they used something in a related area of magic, but different. A real Time Turner would be almost impossible for even the Weasley twins to get. From Vivamus at TaprootTech.com Thu Dec 2 13:17:40 2004 From: Vivamus at TaprootTech.com (Vivamus) Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 08:17:40 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] ghosts, magicians and babies - Minor Point In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200412020818454.SM01064@devbox> No: HPFGUIDX 119071 > > Vivamus: > > > >...edited... > > > > (In fact, I'll go even farther and say that I think that > Neville is by > > far the best candidate I've seen in the books for the HBP, > even though > > he is a pure blood wizard. ... > > > > bboyminn: > > I like this idea; I've always been a big Neville fan, and > have been saying for long long time that Neville is an > extremely important character and a powerful wizard. I also > like to think that there are wizards in some of the minor > branches of the Royal family. > > I think Neville has been groomed in the background for the > entire series so far. JKR is dropping signs the Neville is > someone to keep your eye on, and when we finally see him at > his best, I think we will all be suitably impressed. So, > Neville as HBP, I'd like that. I guess maybe it's because I > alway root for the underdog. Vivamus: I did enjoy some of your posts on him. Yes, there is a *lot* of information we've been given about Neville over the years. If someone hasn't done it yet, I'll put together a compendium of all we've been told about him in canon. Has someone done that yet? > > Vivamus: > > ...why, exactly, the Sorting Hat puts students in different houses. > > Do they go to Gryffindor because they ARE brave, or because > they WANT > > to be brave? The SH put Harry in Gryffindor because that > was Harry's > > choice. ... > > ...edited... > > > > I am hoping we'll find out more about the sorting and the houses in > > the next couple of books. > > > > ...edited... > > > > Vivamus > > bboyminn: > > This is a common misstatement, Harry didn't choose > Gryffindor, he chose NOT Slytherin. I'm guessing based on > statements by Ron, Hagrid, and Hermoine, Harry probably has a > preference for Gryffindor, but he never had a chance to > actually state that preference. Therefore the Hat could have > placed him in Hufflepuff, Ravenclaw, or Gryffindor, and while > the Hat saw aspects of all those houses, it put him in > Gryffindor. I think Harry has demostrated in every book, and > on more than one occassion per book, that he truly has the > Gryffindor spirit. > > Setve/bboyminn (was bboy_mn) I absolutely agree, Steve, that Harry is the quintessential Gryffindor. You are right, all he chose was "not Slytherin," although movie poisoning comes into that a bit, because I believe there was more interaction in the books, both in the sorting and in CoS when he questioned the hat. My point is that Harry's choice played into the SH selection. If it did, then I think we need to ask ourselves just how MUCH does choice play a part. We know it's not fiat, but what exactly IS it? I don't think we've been given much of an answer to that yet. Vivamus From Vivamus at TaprootTech.com Thu Dec 2 13:24:27 2004 From: Vivamus at TaprootTech.com (Vivamus) Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 08:24:27 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: ghosts, magicians and babies - Minor Point In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200412020825211.SM01064@devbox> No: HPFGUIDX 119072 > > > Vivamus: > > > > > >...edited... > > > > > > (In fact, I'll go even farther and say that I think that > Neville is > > > by far the best candidate I've seen in the books for the > HBP, even > > > though he is a pure blood wizard. ... > > Looking at the names of the previous 5 volumes, none of the > titles referred to any character or item that was introduced > in a previous book (with the exception of a very cursory > reference to Sirius Black in the SS). I see no reason to > think that JKR will forego a winning formula, ergo the HBP > will be a new character or a very minor one from previous > books and, I am willing to bet, an adult. > > Salit I guess we are too early, yet, for a general survey. Once the book has been declared as finished and sent to the publishers, though, it would be nice to survey this list for 1. Who do you think is the HBP (and why)? 2. What ten things do you think will happen in HBP? You make a good point about the previous title characters. Personally, I like the idea of it being an already-present character rather than an introduced one. There are so many characters already that JKR has all the resources she needs to do anything she wants with the plot, and my guess is that she is trying to simply rather than expand at this point, since the seven-book story arc is going to wrap up in the next two books. Vivamus From foxmoth at qnet.com Thu Dec 2 14:19:59 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 14:19:59 -0000 Subject: Detached?Lupin In-Reply-To: <03A09B92-4447-11D9-8223-000A95665DE8@m4x.org> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119073 Pippin: > > I've assumed that Lupin would have to hate his former friends to turn against them. But what if he only had to become detached? We've certainly seen lots of examples of that in canon. All thosetimes he speaks "lightly" or "evenly" about things which ought to be very upsetting, we've taken it that he's concealing his feelings. But what if he isn't? What if he's detaching himself?<< > Olivier > I wasn't too convinced by that and for a good reason. In OoP, I was unable to find even one instance of Lupin speaking either lightly nor evenly. < Pippin: Once JKR has established a character's pattern of speech, does she have to keep repeating herself? Or can she do what English-speaking writers are encouraged to do, and keep the adverb tags to a minimum when constructing dialogue? What tone of voice do you impute to "I need scarcely say that I failed dismally." ? (OOP ch 9) Lupin failed as a prefect and he treats that very lightly. That he knows he shouldn't is brought up in chapter 29, when Lupin explains, in inverted order, that he should have told Sirius and James that they were out of order and should lay off Snape, but he didn't, because everyone thought that being arrogant berks was the height of cool. Lupin comforts other characters when it won't cost him anything to do so... but he detaches from people and creatures all too easily. Look at the way he disposes of the dark creatures he cared for in PoA, compared to the way everyone else feels about losing their pets in that book. We haven't seen the side of Peter's character that made James, Sirius and Lupin want to be his friend, but we do know that Lupin was able to set that aside in less than an hour without even hearing Peter's side of the story (I don't count a confession extracted under duress.) He stopped Harry from going through the veil, but then let him go after the equally lethal Bellatrix. Why? Of course Lupin isn't wholly evil, nobody is. Evil in the Potterverse is a *social* problem. You can't pin it down to one person. The Death Eaters as individuals aren't altogether evil, even Voldemort is not, but the Death Eaters as a group definitely are. And Lupin is one of them, or I'm a hobbit. Pippin who isn't a hobbit despite using a hobbit name From foxmoth at qnet.com Thu Dec 2 14:42:40 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 14:42:40 -0000 Subject: OOP: The unknown power In-Reply-To: <20041202014604.70895.qmail@web53104.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119074 > > Ignatia_wildfire wrote: > > > I think it was obvious from the way Dumbledore > > > spoke - I believe the power Harry has that > > > Voldemort will never have is LOVE... > > > Christopher replied: > > I've said this before, and I'll say it again: I > > really, really hope not. If that were so, it > > would make the series fake, Disneylike, cartoonish, > > trite, cliche, and so forth. > > > Now here I go-Juli-: > I have to agree with Christopher, I'd hate if this > power turned out to be love, it's just tacky and > corny, like a children story, say Cinderella, The 3 > Little Bears and so many others. I know HP is a > children's book and everything, but I think they're > beyond that. > Pippin: This reminds me of a character in C.S. Lewis who complained that religion was nothing but "stained glass piety" -- then he remembered what stained glass was really like. I think JKR is a strong enough writer to make us remember what love is really like. Pippin From sherriola at earthlink.net Thu Dec 2 15:08:13 2004 From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes) Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 08:08:13 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Lupin's character arc (was: Character Arcs) In-Reply-To: <20041202044548.18334.qmail@web53103.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <002801c4d880$bf089240$0400a8c0@pensive> No: HPFGUIDX 119075 Sharon/azriona wrote: ...edited. > I mean, for all that he says that he has found it > difficult to find > paid work because of his lycanthropy and all that - > he never once > really expresses regret or bitterness over his > condition. I kind of > think that he's embraced his inner wolf, so to > speak, and is very > happy with himself as he is. Juli now: I don't think Remus is particularly happy with his werewolf condition, he's just accepted it, he's been a werewolf most of his life, it's just who he is, but I think we wouldn't doubt it for a second to leave his lycanthropy (is that even a word?) behind, it's just too much to handle. Juli Sherry now If Lupin's condition is indeed meant to represent disability or disease in some way, then there is definitely a difference between accepting your condition and learning not just to live with it and cope--hate that expression--but to have a good and meaningful life and not sit around feeling sorry for yourself in the process. Yet that acceptance doesn't mean you would not want to have a full recovery from your condition, if suddenly medical science made that possible. We're told it's very painful for him when he transforms, leaves him exhausted and aged before his time. He has had great difficulty finding work due to the prejudice in the WW against werewolves. People are afraid of him, when they learn the truth, even people who liked and trusted him before they knew. I think that he would absolutely want a cure if it was available. I was born with a very painful and debility disease, which is a severe form of childhood arthritis. As an adult in my 40's and having this disease all my life, I live in chronic pain, have several artificial joints and will probably have more. It also damaged my optic nerve and I am blind. This isn't a tragedy; it's just life for me. my parents taught me how to live with my disease, control it, fight it, and in spite of all predictions, I am still walking and moving and typing this message. I lead a very full and active life, and I do not feel deprived in any way or that I have missed anything. I will not pity myself and do not want pity from others. But would I grab the chance to be completely cured? Well, you just bet I would! it would be nice to be without pain, without the concern of will it finally win in the end. it would be nice to drive, for example. It would be great not to have to deal with the automatic prejudice of potential employers when I walk into a job interview with my guide dog and my lap top computer with braille and speech over my shoulder. Do I sit around longing for a cure? no way! I don't have time to sit around waiting for things that aren't likely to happen in my lifetime. That's how I see Lupin, if he's the disabled person of the potter world. He's not sitting around waiting for someone to make it all better--he's fighting in the war, developing relationships, in general living. But I think he would very much want to be cured, to leave the pain and fear behind, to be able to find employment easily instead of finding all the closed doors of prejudice. Is he going to stop living and enjoying life just because there isn't a cure? no, he won't do that, but if it came, I do believe he'd go for it! Sherry From elsyee_h at yahoo.com Thu Dec 2 15:16:02 2004 From: elsyee_h at yahoo.com (Tammy) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 15:16:02 -0000 Subject: The silver hand (Was: The Darkness Within) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119076 azriona: > > I doubt that the hand will disappear. Voldy is supposed to be > super > > strong, magically speaking; I wouldn't put it past him to be able > to > > create an object out of thin air that won't dissipate as rapidly as > > the picnic tables and whatnot that Bill Weasley charms out of > nothing > > in CoS. > > > Geoff: > I presume that you are referring to the picnic which was in GOF, not > COS (Harry doesn't meet Bill and Charlie until then). > > If so, we are told that they were "two battered old tables" > (GOF "Weasleys' Wizard Wheezes" p.57 UK edition) and not produced for > the occasion. Secondly, where does the idea come from that conjured > objects are transient? There is evidence in at least two places - > probably more - that objects are removed by using the > spell "Evanesco". Tammy replies: JKR herself said that conjured objects don't stay around that long - "There is legislation about what you can conjure and what you can't. Something that you conjure out of thin air will not last. This is a rule I set down for myself early on." Thus, if Wormtail's hand is staying around, it must be because it was specifically manufactured by someone at some point. Maybe it's sort of like the food issue, the food stays because the food is cooked by the house elves and it's just "conjured" up to the hall. Perhaps the hand was made beforehand. Amputations have to happen in the magical world too, perhaps it's just a matter of getting the hand from it's storage place, which would mean it doesn't qualify as a conjured item. -Tammy, who knew she read the conjured stuff somewhere and thanks the Lexicon for having everything so nicely ordered so she doesn't have to remember everything she read. From boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com Thu Dec 2 15:09:35 2004 From: boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com (Smythe, Boyd T {FLNA}) Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 09:09:35 -0600 Subject: Snape and Lupin's Character Arcs (was: Lupin's Char Arc) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119077 SSSusan wrote: >>How 'bout the (I suppose boringly) simple possibility that Lupin will serve in the capacity of Harry's mentor? The only remaining member of his parents' tightknit group, the one who no one seems to accuse of being rash or reckless? If Peter is truly the bad egg and Lupin is the good guy (as I believe), then this would be a nice role for him to take on. Goodness knows Harry could use some support from an adult... and one who's been willing to teach him things, answer *some* of his questions, and stand up to the Dursleys. >>There *is* some detachment there, Pippin, you're right, but I see it as less extreme than you, and largely understandable given the nature of his "curse" -- never wanting to get too close to people, never feeling fully a part of anything, being shunned. I could see him & Harry being good for one another, actually.<< << Then Alla wrote: >Yes, this would be ideal role for Remus to take, IMO. Ihave no doubt that he genuinely loves Harry and maybe the realisation that Harry needs him and that no one else now will stand up for Harry as Harry will help him to work on his character flaws. I don't know what Jo will do about Dumbledore/Harry relationship , but at the very least their relationship needs serious reparation. And someone needs to be there for Harry in the meanwhile. >Maybe helping Harry to heal and to train will get rid of Remus' passivity and self-doubt. >Oh, and the other fond dream of mine - if Remus survives , maybe he will be cured at the end. Maybe Snape will cure him, it will make him famous and he will get off Harry's back? :o) < < now boyd: Dammit, you've drawn me into a Snape post! I must be losing my mind! Nope, found it right here next to my desk. OK, I intentionally skipped Snape in my previous post on Character Arcs simply because he is so loved and/or reviled, depending on who you ask. Strong feelings, still no proof of what he is. Lots of folks think he's ESE or at least a "bad guy." But here's why I bring up Snape in response to the Lupin thread: I think Snape makes a better mentor for Harry in books 6+7. "That's #$%* ridiculous!" you say. "Harry hates him! He despises Harry! He couldn't even teach him Occlumency, for heaven's sake!" All true. But look at his character arc. We are introduced to him in SS/PS as a scary looking and mean teacher. Harry instantly thinks he's ESE and is sure he's the villain trying to steal the Stone. But--and here I ask that for the next minute you take JKR's prose at face value--we find out he has ben helping to hide it, and is DD's trusted friend. In the ensuing books, JKR has continued making it ever clearer that not only does DD trust Snape, but that Harry should, as well. Witness his counter-curses during Harry's quiddich match, or the secret orders from DD, or the scene in Umbridge's office when Harry successfully (as we learn later) warns Snape that Sirius is at the MoM. Yes, Snape is presented as perhaps the most flawed of the good guys; he was even a DE. But he has apparently worked tirelessly on behalf of DD& the Order, and while seemingly despising Harry on some level, still manages to want to keep Harry safe. And the main reason he is unsuccessful in teaching Harry Occlumency is: Harry. So how has Snape changed? He has become (in Harry's eyes) more trustworthy. Always nasty in temperament, but on the right side where it counts, and Harry is beginning to notice this. So where does that lead Snape's character in 6+7? To finally being fully trusted by Harry, probably after the death of DD. Yes, Harry will need a mentor, all right, and Snape's character awaits Harry's final gift of full trust. A match made in heaven...or at least Jo's notebook. But Lupin? Why would that happen? Lupin was simply another example of not trusting a book by its cover: looked shabby and a bit mysterious, but then seemed good (and a friend of Harry's father!), then turned out to be flawed by his Lycanthropy although it's not his fault. A sad figure, indeed. It has been said that he is distant, passive. Yes and yes. But did he become less so? No, in fact in his last scene he is still distant, accepting of his fate as the sad castoff. Harry's feelings toward him did not change significantly through the book, either--he always liked him. So as a character, he's done. She has not foreshadowed anything else happening here, nor does the plot or any theme require much more from poor Remus. [ed. note: Unless in the endgame Harry destroys all magic, thereby curing Lupin!] I liked Remus' character as much as the next reader, but I think Snape is the one whose future requires more character development. Sorry! Cast my vote for Snape as the next mentor to Harry (post-DD death, of course). --boyd Be sure to check the FAQs and other fun stuff in the Files and Links sections! From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Thu Dec 2 15:41:56 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 15:41:56 -0000 Subject: Slytherin House again. Was: Re: Problem with OotP? (was: Pampering) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119078 Carol wrote : "The hat isn't looking for an interest in the Dark Arts as a criterion for placement, as far as we know." Del replies : And yet, the only few students we know were interested in the Dark Arts when they arrived at Hogwarts (Snape, Draco, possibly Tom Riddle) have *all* been placed in Slytherin. And Sirius, even though his family was apparently traditionally Slytherin, wasn't placed in there, most probably because he hated the Dark Arts. Carol wrote : " And there has to be a place for the cunning and ambitious types to feel at home, doesn't there?" Del replies : I personally consider the Weasley twins to be cunning and ambitious, and Percy sure is ambitious, and yet none of them was placed in Slytherin. Ernie McMillan also seems to be quite ambitious, at least as far as academic accomplishment goes, and yet he wasn't placed in neither Ravenclaw nor Slytherin. There's also Hermione of course, but as a Muggleborn she couldn't in any way be Sorted into Slytherin. Carol wrote : "In addition, Slytherin House is part of the Hogwarts tradition, honoring one of the four founders, and certain students, notably those from certain pureblood families, expect and *want* to be placed there." Del replies : Yes, but *why* ? Is it really just a matter of "I want to be in the same House as my mommy and/or daddy" ? It's not all the pureblood families who want to be in Slytherin : it's only those who believe in pureblood superiority. I personally call that a *negative* trait, one that shouldn't in any way be encouraged. Those students who want to go to Slytherin want to go there for bad reasons : either because of the pureblood superiority mentality, or because of the interest in the Dark Arts. Giving them what they want isn't helping them. Carol wrote : " Imagine Draco as a Ravenclaw and his thuggy friends as Hufflepuffs. Would any of them be happy with that placement? Would their Ravenclaw and Hufflepuff housemates be happy to have them there?" Del replies : It all depends on whether or not there is still a Slytherin House. If the choice was only between Gryffindor, Ravenclaw and Hufflepuff, then I'm pretty sure Draco would be quite fine in Ravenclaw. As for Crabbe and Goyle, they are just happy to follow a leader, so I think they would do well in Hufflepuff. As for whether or not their Housemates would be happy to have them, I don't think that matters in the least. Ron wasn't happy at first when Hermione was Sorted in Gryffindor. But thanks to his and Harry's influence, Hermione changed and let the best in her come out. I don't see why the same couldn't have happened to Draco and his cronies. Carol wrote : "The only alternative that I can see, other than doing away with all four houses, is to have a separate school for the Slytherin types--and that would almost certainly be worse. If the Lucius Malfoy types got control of it, it would quickly turn into another Durmstrang, a producer of Dark Wizards. Its graduates would probably engage in a power struggle, with the winner becoming the next Grindelwald or Voldemort." Del replies : This is already happening with Slytherin. Lucius Malfoy's son got control of the loud part of Slytherin, and some suspect that Lucius himself might have been the leader of the gang of Slytherins that became DEs. And there's indeed a power struggle between Lucius and Bella (at least those 2), two Slytherins, as to who is the second-in-command among the DEs. Carol wrote : " How JKR can unite the houses and end the Slytherin vs. everyone else antagonism by the end of the seventh book, I don't know, but I don't think that eliminating *only* Slytherin is the answer. (Snape wouldn't like it, either. ;-) )" Del replies : I vote for an elimination of all Houses. The antagonism between the three "good" Houses might not be as strong as between them and Slytherin, but it is already damageable enough in my opinion. We saw in OoP that only a much greater enemy is capable of uniting them strongly enough for them to manage to work together. Del From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Thu Dec 2 15:55:11 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 15:55:11 -0000 Subject: Does Viktor Krum become an important character? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119079 Carol wrote : "I like Viktor Krum and I admire him for not letting the girls who follow him around go to his head. (He probably knows that if he weren't a Quidditch champion, they wouldn't give him a second glance.) But I worry about him. He's been taught the Dark Arts, apparently including the Unforgiveables. He was Karkaroff's favorite boy, and we know what Karkaroff is or was. Is it safe to have Viktor on the good side?" Del replies : Hmmm, interesting question ! I remember that Wronski Feint too. It takes some cold-blooded guts to execute that kind of maneuver, where the goal is to get the other Seeker to *crash*. On the other hand, Hermione is not such a bad judge of character, so if she keeps writing to Viktor, maybe that means he's not that bad ? But she could be mistaken, of course. I guess we can't really know, and the Good Guys will have to give Viktor a try, if he asks for it. They'll have to keep a close eye on him, though, at least at first. Another one that we can't necessarily trust so easily IMO is Fleur. She *is* part-Veela after all. And she's not a native either : do we really know why she came back to England ? Is it strictly for personal reasons, or is it because of LV's rebirth ? In that case, does she want to fight him, or does she want to help him ? I hope Bill is being cautious... Del From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu Dec 2 16:54:56 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 16:54:56 -0000 Subject: OOP: The unknown power In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119080 Ignatia_wildfire wrote: > > > > I think it was obvious from the way Dumbledore > > > > spoke - I believe the power Harry has that > > > > Voldemort will never have is LOVE... Christopher replied: > > > I've said this before, and I'll say it again: I > > > really, really hope not. If that were so, it > > > would make the series fake, Disneylike, cartoonish, > > > trite, cliche, and so forth. Now here I go-Juli-: > > I have to agree with Christopher, I'd hate if this > > power turned out to be love, it's just tacky and > > corny, like a children story, say Cinderella, The 3 > > Little Bears and so many others. I know HP is a > > children's book and everything, but I think they're > > beyond that. Pippin: > This reminds me of a character in C.S. Lewis who complained > that religion was nothing but "stained glass piety" -- then he > remembered what stained glass was really like. I think JKR is a > strong enough writer to make us remember what love is really > like. SSSusan: D'accord, Pippin. There are so many people who remark about wanting the force to *not* be love. As Geoff pointed out, this has been discussed many times before, particularly in terms of there being many types of love. My particular favorite choice for the power is Sacrificial Love, but I won't go into that right now. I do have a question for Juli or anyone else who objects to Love being the power: How did you handle the denouement of SS/PS? DD explained then the reason Quirrell couldn't touch Harry, and the reason was the Love which resides in Harry's skin, there because of his mother's sacrifice. If Love seems so corny, why stick with the series? And, please, I don't mean the question to be disrespectful! I truly would like to know! Love and its power have been put forth in the books JKR before, so if it's so cornball, why wade (and wait) through the rest of the series? Siriusly Snapey Susan From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Thu Dec 2 16:49:45 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 08:49:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Knowing it was Snape (was: What has Snape seen) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041202164945.75767.qmail@web53109.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119081 > SSSusan: > Once again we're at cross purposes. I don't understand why Snape > has to be IN each memory. I have all kinds of memories of people > and places and events, and sometimes the pictures I have in my mind > are of those *other* people and places: my grandfather smoking a > pipe; my mom & dad playing tennis; my brother graduating from med > school. I'm in the audience, as it were, and I don't believe that > if someone accessed my memories they'd see ME; rather, they'd see > those other individuals *as I saw them*, but I'd be nowhere in > sight. > But you're not a character in a book. JKR does not write scenes that don't mean anything. If we saw those memories in Snape's head along with Harry, they are there to mean something about Snape's life. Why would they concern Snape's brother? Or next door neighbours or whatever? Comparisons to real life can only take us up to the limits placed on storytelling. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? All your favorites on one personal page Try My Yahoo! http://my.yahoo.com From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu Dec 2 17:03:30 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 17:03:30 -0000 Subject: Why not ask Hagrid In-Reply-To: <41AE5D2F.70704@telus.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119082 Kathy writes [with a few snips]: > Hagrid tends to get glossed over somehow. He is always > there like a "best supporting" but without being particularly > noticed. > 1. He was at school with Riddle. > 2. He was still at Hogwarts after his expulsion > 3. Hagrid was in the original Order of the Phoenix so he would > have been privy to most of the information. > 4. Hagrid knew all about Harry's parents. Knew them personally > at school and as adults. > 5. Hagrid was at Hogwarts all through the Marauders days and knew > Snape as a student as well. In PS/SS Hagrid denies that Snape > hates Harry but can not meet his eyes. He obviously knows that > Snape hates Harry, and why, and it would appear obvious that this > has recently been discussed. > 7. Hagrid knows something about Snape that causes him to "hotly" > deny that Snape would hurt a student and he was confident that > Snape was not after the stone. > 8. Hagrid could probably shed some light on why everyone was > satisfied at the time that Sirius was the spy. He would also have > known about Lupin. SSSusan: And isn't it funny that Hagrid is *typically* such a blabbermouth, yet none of this has come out! Curious, indeed. As you say, Hagrid seems convinced of Snape's loyalty to the Order, for instance, but he's never let slip anything about why that is. Mr. "I-Shouldn'ta- Said-That"?? Is this because he really *doesn't* know the details, but only knows that DD trusts Snape and that's enough for him? Or has he found a way to keep mum for once? Then, of course, there's that bit about having known James & Lily and Harry's hesitance to ask questions. Drat that kid! I'm glad we're getting near the end so JKR can [geez, I hope!] "allow" him to finally ask some questions. Siriusly Snapey Susan From ejblack at rogers.com Thu Dec 2 17:08:51 2004 From: ejblack at rogers.com (Jeanette) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 17:08:51 -0000 Subject: Detached?Lupin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119083 Pipin wrote: > > Lupin comforts other characters when it won't cost him anything > to do so... but he detaches from people and creatures all too > easily. I think he has HAD to learn to detach himself from people; how often in his life do you think he has met someone he likes, who likes him and then has been flatly rejected when that person found out he was a werewolf. It must been devastating to have that repeated again and again, let alone to be endlessly fired from jobs you are good at (and you must admit, Lupin IS a good teacher.) However one of the main images of him that stick in my mind is Lupin quietly going over to the werewolf bite victim at the hospital. He didn't need to, he could have stayed with his friends and Harry but he went and spent most of the time with the unhappy man. Jeanette From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu Dec 2 17:28:17 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 17:28:17 -0000 Subject: Knowing it was Snape (was: What has Snape seen) In-Reply-To: <20041202164945.75767.qmail@web53109.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119084 SSSusan: >>I don't understand why Snape has to be IN each memory. I have all kinds of memories of people and places and events, and sometimes the pictures I have in my mind are of those *other* people and places: my grandfather smoking a pipe; my mom & dad playing tennis; my brother graduating from med school. I'm in the audience, as it were, and I don't believe that if someone accessed my memories they'd see ME; rather, they'd see those other individuals *as I saw them*, but I'd be nowhere in sight.<< Magda: > But you're not a character in a book. JKR does not write scenes > that don't mean anything. If we saw those memories in Snape's head > along with Harry, they are there to mean something about Snape's > life. Why would they concern Snape's brother? Or next door > neighbours or whatever? > > Comparisons to real life can only take us up to the limits placed on > storytelling. SSSusan: Absolutely the things she writes are there because they mean something. But she hides things from us all the time! We never know WHERE those hidden stories or clues are coming from. Isn't that part of the fun? Trying to figure out *where* she might have laid a clue which isn't so obvious? The comparison to real life was there only to show that the person himself doesn't have to APPEAR in the memory. I don't see any reason for storytelling to be different from real life in that. Siriusly Snapey Susan From spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com Thu Dec 2 17:55:50 2004 From: spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com (dungrollin) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 17:55:50 -0000 Subject: OOP: The unknown power In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119085 (snipping previous posts) SSSusan wrote: There are so many people who remark about wanting the force to *not* be love. As Geoff pointed out, this has been discussed many times before, particularly in terms of there being many types of love. My particular favorite choice for the power is Sacrificial Love, but I won't go into that right now. I do have a question for Juli or anyone else who objects to Love being the power: How did you handle the denouement of SS/PS? DD explained then the reason Quirrell couldn't touch Harry, and the reason was the Love which resides in Harry's skin, there because of his mother's sacrifice. If Love seems so corny, why stick with the series? And, please, I don't mean the question to be disrespectful! I truly would like to know! Love and its power have been put forth in the books JKR before, so if it's so cornball, why wade (and wait) through the rest of the series? Dungrollin: An excellent question, and one that I realise I've wondered about without actually putting into words. Why did I stick with the series? I suppose it's because it was only one paragraph at the end that I found slushy, and the rest of the book was so much fun. And it intrigued me. It didn't quite fit with my impression of the rest of the book. I already had the second one at hand, and wanted to find out what happened, and probably wondered if it was going to hinge on something slushy (though I don't really remember). And once I'd finished the second one (slush-free), it seemed completely plausible that there was more to it than the paragraph of DD's about Harry being protected because his mother had loved him so much. It's the same thing that keeps me reading them now - the hope that the denoument of book 7 is going to be something completely unexpected. The thing is, JKR hasn't ever talked about sacrificial love, has she? She's said that the trait she values above all others is courage. Which leaves those of us who find the idea a little slushy with some hope that what lies behind the door may be something more original, (and less overtly religious). And what was it that foiled Voldy's possession attempt in the MoM? Didn't see any *sacrificial* love in the vicinity there... Was it the love for Sirius filling Harry's heart that drove Voldy out, or was it that Harry had accepted death? What's certain is that the power behind the door is important, and will be an integral part of the final showdown. She's hardly likely to make it something easily guessable, is she? It remains possible that the whole love thing is misdirection. And thus hope is alive... From caseylane at wideopenwest.com Thu Dec 2 18:04:46 2004 From: caseylane at wideopenwest.com (Casey) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 18:04:46 -0000 Subject: Knowing it was Snape (was: What has Snape seen) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119086 > SSSusan: > Absolutely the things she writes are there because they mean > something. But she hides things from us all the time! We never know > WHERE those hidden stories or clues are coming from. Isn't that part > of the fun? Trying to figure out *where* she might have laid a clue > which isn't so obvious? > > The comparison to real life was there only to show that the person > himself doesn't have to APPEAR in the memory. I don't see any reason > for storytelling to be different from real life in that. > > Siriusly Snapey Susan At work so I can't look. When Snape was looking at Harry's memories, did he see any scenes without Harry? That would be where to make the comparison I think. Casey From mommystery at hotmail.com Thu Dec 2 20:13:57 2004 From: mommystery at hotmail.com (mommystery2003) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 20:13:57 -0000 Subject: Does Viktor Krum become an important character? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119087 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > But I'm wondering why you think Krum is not what he seems--a famous > athlete who is in all other respects an ordinary and very shy > schoolboy with few social skills? I can't really explain why I think there is more to Krum Carol - it's just a gut feeling I get whenever his name comes up in the story - a suspicous feeling that there is some ulterior motive for everything he says and does. Ces From eloiseherisson at aol.com Thu Dec 2 20:15:55 2004 From: eloiseherisson at aol.com (eloise_herisson) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 20:15:55 -0000 Subject: Knowing it was Snape (was: What has Snape seen) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119088 > SSSusan: >I don't understand why Snape > has to be IN each memory. I have all kinds of memories of people > and places and events, and sometimes the pictures I have in my mind > are of those *other* people and places: my grandfather smoking a > pipe; my mom & dad playing tennis; my brother graduating from med > school. I'm in the audience, as it were, and I don't believe that > if someone accessed my memories they'd see ME; rather, they'd see > those other individuals *as I saw them*, but I'd be nowhere in sight. The way that JKR deals with Pensieve "memories" is a bit odd, though. When Harry dips his head into Dumbledore's Pensieve, he witness the hearings as if he himself were there, not from Dumbledore's own perspective, in fact he *sees* Dumbledore there. If he were truly inside Dumbledore's own recollection then a) he wouldn't be seeing Dubledore himself and b) (more crucially) he would know Dumbledore's thoughts at the time. In the same way, he sees Tom Riddle when he accesses his memories via the Diary. In other words the memories all seem to be narrated in the third person rather than the first person and also are without the emotional resonances and personal insights that our own memories have for us. ~Eloise From willsonkmom at msn.com Thu Dec 2 20:19:21 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 20:19:21 -0000 Subject: Does Viktor Krum become an important character? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119089 >>>Ces wrote: > I can't really explain why I think there is more to Krum Carol - it's just a gut feeling I get whenever his name comes up in the story - a suspicous feeling that there is some ulterior motive for everything he says and does. Potioncat: Given JKR's lovely use of names and sounds, "Krum" ranks right up there with "Kreacher" if you ask me. Of course, she may have been setting him against type. From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu Dec 2 20:26:38 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 20:26:38 -0000 Subject: Knowing it was Snape (was: What has Snape seen) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119090 SSSusan: >>I don't understand why Snape has to be IN each memory. I have all kinds of memories of people and places and events, and sometimes the pictures I have in my mind are of those *other* people and places: my grandfather smoking a pipe; my mom & dad playing tennis; my brother graduating from med school. I'm in the audience, as it were, and I don't believe that if someone accessed my memories they'd see ME; rather, they'd see those other individuals *as I saw them*, but I'd be nowhere in sight.<< Eloise: > The way that JKR deals with Pensieve "memories" is a bit odd, > though. When Harry dips his head into Dumbledore's Pensieve, he > witness the hearings as if he himself were there, not from > Dumbledore's own perspective, in fact he *sees* Dumbledore there. > If he were truly inside Dumbledore's own recollection then a) he > wouldn't be seeing Dubledore himself and b) (more crucially) he > would know Dumbledore's thoughts at the time. In the same way, he > sees Tom Riddle when he accesses his memories via the Diary. In > other words the memories all seem to be narrated in the third > person rather than the first person and also are without the > emotional resonances and personal insights that our own memories > have for us. SSSusan: Right, I agree about the pensieve. But what I was talking about were the memories Harry accessed during Occlumency lessons, not those memories he experienced when he dipped his head into the pensieve. It's the snippets of memories he got directly from Snape that we had been talking about and which I was saying shouldn't require the person himself to be a participant in. Does that make sense? I think Casey may have had the right question, whether *Harry* was in each of the memory snippets Snape accessed during Occlumency. If he was, I'll be more inclined to concede. Siriusly Snapey Susan From drliss at comcast.net Thu Dec 2 20:33:55 2004 From: drliss at comcast.net (drliss at comcast.net) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 20:33:55 +0000 Subject: Detatched?Lupin Message-ID: <120220042033.16619.41AF7C320008B436000040EB22058860149C9C07049D0B@comcast.net> No: HPFGUIDX 119091 Pippin: He stopped Harry from going through the veil, but then let him go after the equally lethal Bellatrix. Why? Of course Lupin isn't wholly evil, nobody is. Evil in the Potterverse is a *social* problem. You can't pin it down to one person. The Death Eaters as individuals aren't altogether evil, even Voldemort is not, but the Death Eaters as a group definitely are. And Lupin is one of them, or I'm a hobbit. Lissa: Life in the Shire treating you well then? ;) Sorry. Couldn't resist. Actually, the part of the post I wanted to respond to was the question about why Lupin wouldn't let Harry go through the Veil but let him go after Bellatrix. For SOME reason (it would really be nice to know why!), Lupin knew the veil was deadly, and if you go through it, you don't come back. It's kind of like walking around a volcano: you have two options- live or die. You don't get hurt. So Lupin held Harry back from the Veil. When he released Harry and Harry went after Bella, Lupin DID actually try to restrain him. But he missed, and Harry broke free. At that point the adreniline had worn off, Lupin was dealing with his own grief, and Harry running after Bella surprised him. Add to it that Lupin is not in the best shape (considering he's often tired and worn looking) and Harry is an athletic 15 year old kid who is bent on getting away, and Lupin doesn't have that much of a chance. Plus, Lupin's mind has started focusing on the other six kids that have entered the Ministry- he knows that they're in trouble as well. Makes sense: he's the former professor in those in the Order, and he's the one that knows these kids personally. There are other Order wizards around when Harry runs off: most notably Dumbledore. Add to that that Harry has dueled Voldemort before and escaped alive (thus proving his own competence), and it becomes less necessary for Lupin to go chasing after Harry- especially when DD is watching out for him and there are other kids that need his help. And lastly, although she's just proven herself very deadly, Bella is not the clear live-or-die threat that the Veil is. If Harry had passed through the Veil, he would have died. (Or at least that's what Lupin seems to think.) 100% chance. Chasing after Bella, it's not a 100% chance that Harry's a goner. Lastly, the scene with Harry, Bella, Voldie, and DD is crowded enough. Action is incredibly tough to write, and the last thing you need is to break the action to describe what someone else is doing. Maybe Lupin WAS chasing Harry and trying to get him away, but since he was unsuccessful we don't know, because it simply doesn't fit in. I do agree that Lupin is detatched in many ways. But I think given the way the world treats him and having (thought) he lost all three of his closest friends on the same day... it lends itself to detatchment. And as for the Dark Creatures... I never felt like they were pets to him. He didn't introduce Harry to Grindy the Grindylow or anything: he treated them like creatures. I kind of think of Lupin as more of a biologist/scientist type, actually. He IS detatched, but I see that as normal for someone that's had the kind of grief in his life that he has. But Death Eater or evil... well, hand me a PARTY LINE badge, even if I have been quiet these days ;) Liss [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From Elvishooked at hotmail.com Thu Dec 2 21:01:11 2004 From: Elvishooked at hotmail.com (Inge) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 21:01:11 -0000 Subject: Harry/Riddle Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119092 I've been away from this great list for a long time - but today I had (another) crazy thought that I want to throw in here. Can Harry and Tom Riddle be one and the same - for some yet unknown reason living in different times? Is there any way? And what would it mean if so? The reason I ask is because I got to think of some quotes (that may have nothing to do with each other when it comes down to it) and had them connected - as fx.: 1)Dumbledore: "In essense divided." 2)Dumbledore: "The truth is a beautiful and terrible thing, and should therefore be treated with great caution." 3)Dumbledore: "It is our choises, Harry, that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities." 4)The Sorting Hat: "Not Slytherin, eh? Are you sure? You could be great, you know, it's all here in your head and Slytherin will help you on the way to greatness, no doubt about that." 5)The Prophecy: "...and either must die at the hand of the other for neither can live while the other survives..." I could go on and on and am sure some of you can find more quotes to lead in that direction.... I may very well be on a very wrong track here - but what if the reason Voldemort couldn't kill Harry was because Harry was himself? Voldemort lost his body that night, trying to AK Harry - but had he killed Harry he would've died himself, too (assuming Voldemort and Harry are one and the same). Not sure if anyone has an idea of where Im going with this. Not even sure if I have one myself. Was just thinking (and typing).... Need book 6 - soon. Inge From Elvishooked at hotmail.com Thu Dec 2 21:14:21 2004 From: Elvishooked at hotmail.com (Inge) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 21:14:21 -0000 Subject: Harry/Riddle (2) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119093 Forgot to put in my best 'evidence' in the previous post - Harry's feeling of having know Riddle. "....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 samll and half-forgotten." From willsonkmom at msn.com Thu Dec 2 21:16:32 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 21:16:32 -0000 Subject: Occlumency Memories (was Re: Knowing it was Snape )(was: What has Snape seen) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119094 > SSSusan: snip I think Casey may have had the right question, whether *Harry* was in each of the memory snippets Snape accessed during Occlumency. If he was, I'll be more inclined to concede. Potioncat: I only have time to look at one session, the first one. And I think I see one memory that does not include Harry. I've paraphrased all from the book, but I've quoted all of the one I mean. All of the other memories mention Harry in some way. OoP, Occlumency p.535 Harry is 5 watching Dudley with a new bike He was 9 being chased up a tree by Ripper He was sitting under the sorting hat "...Hermione was lying in the hospital wing, her face covered with thick black hair..." Cho was approaching him A dragon rearing in front of him His parents waving at him from the mirror Cedric Diggory staring at him He was watching Uncle Vernon He was with Mr. Weasley in the corridor I don't know if that helps? From ohneill_2001 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 2 21:45:13 2004 From: ohneill_2001 at yahoo.com (ohneill_2001) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 21:45:13 -0000 Subject: Harry/Riddle In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119095 Inge wrote: > Can Harry and Tom Riddle be one and the same - for some yet unknown > reason living in different times? Is there any way? And what would it > mean if so? Now Cory: I've had thoughts along these lines before too, and am very curious to find out what the connection is between Harry and Riddle (especially in light of the fact that Harry felt like he knew Riddle). However, I don't think this can be it. For one thing, if they were one and the same, they would not be "living in different times," for when Voldemort tried to AK Infant!Harry, they were in fact living in the *same* time. One could argue that Riddle is not Voldemort or that Voldemort was not "naturally" alive at that time because of all he had undergone to try to achieve immortality, but in the end I don't think you can get around the fact that Voldemort is the same being as Riddle, and that he and Harry were (are) living in the same time. --Cory From gbannister10 at aol.com Thu Dec 2 21:49:31 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 21:49:31 -0000 Subject: OOP: The unknown power In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119096 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dungrollin" wrote: Dungrollin: > The thing is, JKR hasn't ever talked about sacrificial love, > has she? She's said that the trait she values above all others > is courage. Which leaves those of us who find the idea a little > slushy with some hope that what lies behind the door may be > something more original, (and less overtly religious). Geoff: Well then, how do you equate that with the following.... '"But why couldn't Quirrell touch me?" "Your mother died to save you. If there is one thing Voldemort cannot understand, it is love. He didn't realise that love so 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 some protection for ever. It is in your very skin."' (PS "The Man with Two Faces" p.216 UK edition) If that isn't JKR talking about sacrificial love, then I'm the next DADA teacher... It is never slushy love in such a situation. As I said earlier, the problem is what do we mean by "love"? There are examples of sacrificial love throughout life. Parents who give up their lives to save their children, folk who step into a dangerous situation for the sake of others in peril (I think of my local lifeboat crew who frequently lay their lives on the line for strangers in trouble). As a side issue, I believe as a Christian that Christ's sacrificial love is the heartbeat of the universe but others may not want to be overtly religious. My answer is I'm not religious, I have a faith; there is a difference rather like the four types of love recognised in Greek. The fact is that, without real, sacrifical love, the world becomes a dictatorship where what we do is driven by fear and there is no room for showing compassion and empathy for its own sake. We might all as well join Voldemort on the "what's in it for me" merry- go-round. From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu Dec 2 21:59:26 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 21:59:26 -0000 Subject: Occlumency Memories (was Re: Knowing it was Snape )(was: What has Snape seen) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119097 SSSusan: > snip > I think Casey may have had the right question, whether *Harry* was > in each of the memory snippets Snape accessed during Occlumency. > If he was, I'll be more inclined to concede. Potioncat: > I only have time to look at one session, the first one. And I > think I see one memory that does not include Harry. I've > paraphrased all from the book, but I've quoted all of the one I > mean. All of the other memories mention Harry in some way. > OoP, Occlumency p.535 > Harry is 5 watching Dudley with a new bike > He was 9 being chased up a tree by Ripper > He was sitting under the sorting hat > "...Hermione was lying in the hospital wing, her face covered with > thick black hair..." > Cho was approaching him > > A dragon rearing in front of him > His parents waving at him from the mirror > Cedric Diggory staring at him > > He was watching Uncle Vernon > He was with Mr. Weasley in the corridor > > I don't know if that helps? SSSusan: It does. Thank you, Potioncat. My only point all along was that, while it's *likely* that the person Harry saw in those snippets was Snape himself, I don't believe we know that as solid fact. It *could* be Snape's memory of some other family member whom he resembled. Merci, Siriusly Snapey Susan From gbannister10 at aol.com Thu Dec 2 22:02:59 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 22:02:59 -0000 Subject: Harry/Riddle In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119098 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Inge" wrote: Inge: > I've been away from this great list for a long time - but today I had > (another) crazy thought that I want to throw in here. > > Can Harry and Tom Riddle be one and the same - for some yet unknown > reason living in different times? Is there any way? And what would it > mean if so? Geoff: This throws up an interesting thought. If that were so, then when Harry meets his older persona in COS, why isn't Tom Riddle totally identical in looks to a slightly older Harry? And, after all, Diary!Riddle says: "I can see now - there is nothing special about you, after all. I wondered, you see. Because there are strange likenesses between us, Harry Potter. Even you must have noticed. Both half-bloods, raised by Muggles. Probably the only two Parselmouths to come to Hogwarts since the great Slytherin himself. We even look something alike..." (COS "the Heir of Slytherin" p.233 UK edition) Similar.... but not identical.... From Elvishooked at hotmail.com Thu Dec 2 22:13:55 2004 From: Elvishooked at hotmail.com (Inge) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 22:13:55 -0000 Subject: Harry/Riddle In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119099 "Inge" wrote: I've been away from this great list for a long time - but today I had (another) crazy thought that I want to throw in here. Can Harry and Tom Riddle be one and the same - for some yet unknown reason living in different times? Is there any way? And what would it mean if so? *** Geoff replied: <> And, after all, Diary!Riddle says: "I can see now - there is nothing special about you, after all. I wondered, you see. Because there are strange likenesses between us, Harry Potter. Even you must have noticed. Both half-bloods, raised by Muggles. Probably the only two Parselmouths to come to Hogwarts since the great Slytherin himself. We even look something alike..." (COS "the Heir of Slytherin" p.233 UK edition) Similar.... but not identical.... *** Inge again: In COS when Harry meets Tom, Harry is 12 and Tom is 16 (or close). They can not physically (yet) look identical..... let's see what Harry looks like in book 6. Ginny might recognize him as Tom..... Just a thought. From gbannister10 at aol.com Thu Dec 2 22:25:27 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 22:25:27 -0000 Subject: Harry/Riddle In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119100 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Inge" wrote: Inge: > In COS when Harry meets Tom, Harry is 12 and Tom is 16 (or close). > They can not physically (yet) look identical..... let's see what > Harry looks like in book 6. Ginny might recognize him as Tom..... > Just a thought. Geoff: but he's not got glasses or a scar.... Again, as he tells Dippet, he lives in a Muggel orphanage. Has Harry gone back in time? How can he have been in Tom's situation and the Dursleys as well? I don't personally buy it... As Miles O'Brien remarks in ST:DS9, "I hate temporal mechanics!" From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 2 22:31:53 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 22:31:53 -0000 Subject: Slytherin House again. Was: Re: Problem with OotP? (was: Pampering) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119101 > Kim chimed in: > > I hadn't even noticed this aspect of Dumbledore's Army. It seems > a > > shame to me too, but also not surprising that no Slytherins > joined. > > I think that JKR may want to set the Slytherins as an example of > > people who are *potentially* interested in benefiting the common > > good, but are too caught up in their own ambitions to get > involved. > > That's why they're in Slytherin in the first place, isn't it? But > I > > think it's necessary to show all walks of WW society, even in a > > school setting, as Jeanette says. "It takes all kinds to make a > > world" can sometimes be a sad but true statement. It seems to me > > too that another purpose of Slytherin House is to show the > remaining > > three houses the *wrong* way to behave, and the other three houses > > are there to show the Slytherins the *right* ways to behave, in a > > sense. Although I suppose there are good things to be said for > > Slytherin-style ambition, it, like other double-edged character > > traits, is dangerous if it's not tempered by more positive traits. > > > > Just wondering: Are there any non-pureblood Slytherins? Harry > had > > his chance to be in Slytherin, and he's not a pureblood, but maybe > he > > had a chance only because he *was* Harry (i.e. the boy who > lived). I > > can't think of any others (except Tom Riddle, of course). Anyway, > a > > non-pureblood Slytherin would be in for a pretty rough time from > most > > of his/her fellow Slytherins, so it would seem. > > > Hannah replied: JKR has hinted (as only she can) that maybe Snape isn't > pureblood. She says (in a webchat somewhere) that he's not a > muggleborn, but she deliberately doesn't say he's pureblooded. So > I'm guessing he's half blood. But other than Malfoy, we don't > really know much about the backgrounds of any of the other > Slytherins, except that a disproportionate number have DE fathers. > Goyle could be half troll for all we know (joking here!) > > I think there must be some half blooded Slytherins, simply because > pure bloods are supposed to be getting rarer, and there are quite a > few pure bloods in other houses. I think it's just muggle-borns > that really wouldn't be able to be sorted into Slytherin. OTOH, I > don't see why a muggle born couldn't be sneaky, ambitious, etc. > Maybe if they were, they'd still be put into Slytherin. The whole > allocation of houses process seems so utterly stupid to me that I'd > believe anything of it! > > No reasoning, however logical, could persuade me that having > Slytherin as a way to identify potential dark wizards, or to show > the other nice children what nasty children are like, is anything > other that utterly reprehensible. These children are 11 years old > when they get sorted! The idea of damning a quarter of them at that > age to simply serve as an example to others, or to wait out the days > till they become a death eater, is horrible. Talk about self- > fulfulling prophecies! Kim now: Yes, I can see Snape being part-Muggle and maybe being ashamed of it for some reason, the way Tom Riddle was ashamed of his muggle heritage. The great thing is that in only two more books, we shall see! As sad as I'll be to see the series end, I'm anxious to know the answers (at least as many answers as JKR will tell us!) Also it makes sense, your point that there statistically would have to be some non-purebloods in Slytherin. Magical folk are a vanishing breed, as you say. Will have to put on a different thinking cap in order to figure out just why that is so, outside of the obvious numbers of wizards and witches that were done in during the previous reign of Lord Voldemort... It's definitely an odd twist of "racism" that it actually may cause the so-called "pure" group to go out of existence eventually. As to Muggle-borns in Slytherin, why to tell the truth, I'd see plenty of *pure Muggles* belonging in Slytherin if the criteria were only that they be sneaky and ambitious! There are far too many of that type out here in the real world among us Muggles (we are Muggles, aren't we...? ;-) I agree that it's a rather negative way to view mere 11 year olds, seeing them as already so far-gone by that age that they automatically qualify for the worst of the 4 houses (of course someone is welcome to chime in as to why Slytherin may not be such a bad house after all...). Unfortunately most people could probably come up with various memories from their own childhoods of children aged 11 or even younger that were already "bad seeds." Who's to blame however for why they were already bad at such a young age may be a separate discussion. My point on second consideration ought to have been that Slytherin House exists not to make its children *permanently* serve as an example to "good" children, but to place them where it seems appropriate based on who they already appear to be (even at age 11) and then hopefully over time, they'll broaden their view of the world from self-focused to something more tolerant and inclusive. Maybe that's the problem with separate houses in the first place, that they may pigeonhole the students unfairly. No one can be really sure what good or evil any of the students are capable of until the time comes for them to be tested. So I repeat, We shall see, we shall see... ;-) Kim From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 2 22:33:02 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 22:33:02 -0000 Subject: Snape and Lupin's Character Arcs (was: Lupin's Char Arc) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119102 Boyd: > OK, I intentionally skipped Snape in my previous post on Character Arcs simply because he is so loved and/or reviled, depending on who you ask. Strong feelings, still no proof of what he is. Lots of folks think he's ESE or at least a "bad guy." Alla: I am sure you know my position by now - I don't believe he is ESE as in Voldemort's cervant,but I also don't believe that he is a good guy. Good guys don't do to human beings half of his size what he does to Harry and Neville, IMO. Boyd: > But here's why I bring up Snape in response to the Lupin thread: I think Snape makes a better mentor for Harry in books 6+7. "That's #$%* ridiculous!" you say. "Harry hates him! He despises Harry! He couldn't even teach him Occlumency, for heaven's sake!" All true. But look at his character arc. We are introduced to him in SS/PS as a scary looking and mean teacher. Harry instantly thinks he's ESE and is sure he's the villain trying to steal the Stone. But--and here I ask that for the next minute you take JKR's prose at face value--we find out he has ben helping to hide it, and is DD's trusted friend. > In the ensuing books, JKR has continued making it ever clearer that not only does DD trust Snape, but that Harry should, as well. Witness his counter-curses during Harry's quiddich match, or the secret orders from DD, or the scene in Umbridge's office when Harry successfully (as we learn later) warns Snape that Sirius is at the MoM. Yes, Snape is presented as perhaps the most flawed of the good guys; he was even a DE. But he has apparently worked tirelessly on behalf of DD& the Order, and while seemingly despising Harry on some level, still manages to want to keep Harry safe. And the main reason he is unsuccessful in teaching Harry Occlumency is: Harry. So how has Snape changed? He has become (in Harry's eyes) more trustworthy.Always nasty in temperament, but on the right side where it counts, and Harry is beginning to notice this. So where does that lead Snape's character in 6+7? To finally being fully trusted by Harry, probably after the death of DD. Alla: Well, I won't say that this is riduculous, because I see what are you saying , but I disagree. I see Snape's character arc differently than you do. Indeed , Jo set him up quite nicely as villain in the first book and indeed Harry knows that he is on the good side now, BUT there wasa huge setback between them at the end of OOP. There is no trust on Harry's part. There is that blasted "He'll never forgive Snape ever" We as readers know that Harry will eventually forgive him, but Harry does not. There should be reparation of their relationship BEFORE any mentor- student relationship could be established. And I will argue that A LOT of time will pass before it happen, if it ever happens at all. I will argue closer to the end of bookk 7, actually. So, No, I don't think that Snape will be in any position to give mentoring to Harry and hopefully Dumbledore will not try to force anything between them, allowing time, or I will officially label Dumbledore as an idiot in my book. :o) Boyd: >Yes, Harry will need a mentor, all right, and Snape's character awaits Harry's final gift of full trust. A match made in heaven...or at least Jo's notebook. Alla: Sorry, I don't mind Snape participating in harry's training eventually, but I hope that he is not going to be his only mentor. Boyd: But Lupin? Why would that happen? Lupin was simply another example of not trusting a book by its cover: looked shabby and a bit mysterious, but then seemed good (and a friend of Harry's father!), then turned out to be flawed by his Lycanthropy although it's not his fault. A sad figure, indeed. It has been said that he is distant, passive. Yes and yes. But did he become less so? No, in fact in his last scene he is still distant, accepting of his fate as the sad castoff. Alla: Because I am one of those sentimental types, who believe that Harry's mentor should eventually give him some emotional support, besides preparing him for the battle with Voldy and I think that Snape is in no position ot give Harry that, neither will Harry accept that type of support from Snape. Lupin is in MUCH better position to do that as someone whom Harry trusts and loves already. I will argue that he did became less passive in the last scene, because he did interfere on harry's behalf. Maybe closer relationship with Harry will help him become more assertive. From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu Dec 2 22:37:06 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 22:37:06 -0000 Subject: OOP: The unknown power In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119103 SSSusan wrote: > There are so many people who remark about wanting the force to > *not* be love. As Geoff pointed out, this has been discussed many > times before, particularly in terms of there being many types of > love. My particular favorite choice for the power is Sacrificial > Love, but I won't go into that right now. > > I do have a question for Juli or anyone else who objects to Love > being the power: How did you handle the denouement of SS/PS? DD > explained then the reason Quirrell couldn't touch Harry, and the > reason was the Love which resides in Harry's skin, there because of > his mother's sacrifice. If Love seems so corny, why stick with the > series? And, please, I don't mean the question to be disrespectful! > I truly would like to know! Love and its power have been put forth > in the books JKR before, so if it's so cornball, why wade (and > wait) through the rest of the series? Dungrollin: > An excellent question, and one that I realise I've wondered about > without actually putting into words. > > Why did I stick with the series? I suppose it's because it was > only one paragraph at the end that I found slushy, and the rest of > the book was so much fun. And it intrigued me. It didn't quite > fit with my impression of the rest of the book. I already had the > second one at hand, and wanted to find out what happened, and > probably wondered if it was going to hinge on something slushy > (though I don't really remember). And once I'd finished the > second one (slush-free), it seemed completely plausible that there > was more to it than the paragraph of DD's about Harry being > protected because his mother had loved him so much. > > It's the same thing that keeps me reading them now - the hope that > the denoument of book 7 is going to be something completely > unexpected. SSSusan: I wanted to say how very much I liked your answer to this question of why you stuck with it, Dungrollin. It makes total sense to me. Like you, I'd thought about this only in a fleeting manner before, but even I -- who favor the power being SACRIFICIAL Love [a very special sort of Love, rare indeed] -- found the movie representation of that closing scene rather schmaltzy. Given that, I've wondered about folks who object strenuously to the possible Love theme... and your answer really does jibe with what I've thought about it myself, rather below the surface. Dungrollin: > The thing is, JKR hasn't ever talked about sacrificial love, > has she? She's said that the trait she values above all others > is courage. Which leaves those of us who find the idea a little > slushy with some hope that what lies behind the door may be > something more original, (and less overtly religious). > > What's certain is that the power behind the door is important, > and will be an integral part of the final showdown. She's hardly > likely to make it something easily guessable, is she? It remains > possible that the whole love thing is misdirection. And thus hope > is alive... SSSusan: As for sacrificial love and whether it fits vs. something like courage, there is DD's describing the DoM power as being "more wonderful and more terrible than death." I can much more easily imagine sacrificial love's fitting those two extremes of wonderful & terrible than I can courage. Does that make sense? Dungrollin: > And what was it that foiled Voldy's possession attempt in the > MoM? Didn't see any *sacrificial* love in the vicinity there... > Was it the love for Sirius filling Harry's heart that drove Voldy > out, or was it that Harry had accepted death? SSSusan: This is an excellent question. If the answer is that it was that Harry had accepted death, does that have an impact on what the power behind the door is? Acceptance of death. More powerful and wonderful than death itself? Could that be it? Siriusly Snapey Susan From Elvishooked at hotmail.com Thu Dec 2 22:38:56 2004 From: Elvishooked at hotmail.com (Inge) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 22:38:56 -0000 Subject: Harry/Riddle In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119104 Inge: In COS when Harry meets Tom, Harry is 12 and Tom is 16 (or close). They can not physically (yet) look identical..... let's see what Harry looks like in book 6. Ginny might recognize him as Tom..... Just a thought. ** Geoff: but he's not got glasses or a scar.... Again, as he tells Dippet, he lives in a Muggel orphanage. Has Harry gone back in time? How can he have been in Tom's situation and the Dursleys as well? I don't personally buy it... As Miles O'Brien remarks in ST:DS9, "I hate temporal mechanics!" ** Inge once again: Im not asking for anyone to buy this *theory* - I just thought that maybe somebody had other *clues* that might point in the direction that Harry and Tom are one and the same. You are quite right that Tom doesn't wear glasses and doesn't have a scar. For them to be one and the same he doesn't have to. We don't know why Harry wears glasses. Could be caused by something that happened when Tom tried to AK him. The scar is obvious - we know where that comes from. Im not meaning to say that Harry and Tom live the same life over - Im thinking more in lines of TimeTurning - but then again not quite. Something similar. What I was trying to say in my first post was that if Harry is Tom Riddle (time-turned or something the like) - then Dumbledore knows and tries everything he can to guide Harry in the right direction so that he will not turn out to become Voldemort over again. If Harry manages to remain *good* - then there will be no future *bad Voldemort*. Voldemort will 'vanish' - into thin air maybe.... Voldemort (not Riddle)knows this, too, and that is why he needs to destroy Harry - because if he doesn't that will mean a natural destruction of Voldemort himself. I wish I could explain myself in better words - but as I said earlier - Im not even quite sure myself what Im getting at here.... only that it makes sense in my head ;-) From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 2 22:51:49 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 22:51:49 -0000 Subject: Slytherin House again. Was: Re: Problem with OotP? (was: Pampering) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119105 Pippin: > Whoa! There are somewhere between 70 and 250 Slytherins > enroled at Hogwarts, and we know of less than ten who became > DE's. That's hardly a majority. Alla: Hmm, good point, but I think that the students which we know kinda meant to be the representatives of the Houses. Are we supposed to IMAGINE for example that there is a good Slytherin, if Jo does not show us one? And all Slytherin grown-ups whom we saw int he books, did become DE, unless Iforgot somebody. Pippin: > If, as JKR has said, children are basically good unless they are very damaged, then there is nothing inherently evil about the Slytherin children. Their moral development suffers because the notion that magical races are inherently noble discourages them from thinking they need moral guidance, especially from 'lesser' types. The Slytherins are there, IMO, so JKR can demonstrate why, if children are basically good, they *need* moral guidance -- because those damaged individuals like Voldemort will otherwise lead them astray. On the WW level, they are there because the Slytherin parents wouldn't have it any other way. Alla: Well, OK, you are basically saying that those children with potential to "go bad" so to speak are grouped in Slytherin to give him help and to stop them from doing bad. My point and Del's point was that we don't see anybody helping them out at all. I guess you can argue that Snape counsels them somehow in the Dungeons, but IMO Snape is so damaged himself that he cannot help those kids effectively. JMO, of course. From stevejjen at earthlink.net Thu Dec 2 23:07:12 2004 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 23:07:12 -0000 Subject: Detached?Lupin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119106 > Pippin: > Once JKR has established a character's pattern of speech, does > she have to keep repeating herself? Or can she do what > English-speaking writers are encouraged to do, and keep the > adverb tags to a minimum when constructing dialogue? > > What tone of voice do you impute to "I need scarcely say that I > failed dismally." ? (OOP ch 9) Jen: We have proof beyond a shadow of a doubt that JKR loves adverbs, and generally uses them with great abandon. I see no reason why she would scrimp on Lupin. And as for the quote above, Lupin also frequently uses sarcasm to make his point (especially when he's wryly musing about his own actions). That's a commonly accepted way, and one JKR uses on herself, to point out personal failings without drenching ourselves in self-condemnation or everyone else in obsequiousness,i.e. Peter's hem-kissing-knee-walking apologies to Sirius & Lupin. Pippin: > Lupin failed as a prefect and he treats that very lightly. That he > knows he shouldn't is brought up in chapter 29, when Lupin > explains, in inverted order, that he should have told Sirius and > James that they were out of order and should lay off Snape, but > he didn't, because everyone thought that being arrogant berks > was the height of cool. Jen: I hope 20 years after the fact Lupin isn't flagellating himself for mistakes he made at Hogwarts as a prefect! That would be pretty sad if he can't let himself off the hook for being a bad role-model and leader when he's almost middle-aged now. Alot of time and circumstances have gone under the bridge since that one year of his life. Pippin: > Lupin comforts other characters when it won't cost him anything > to do so... but he detaches from people and creatures all too > easily. Look at the way he disposes of the dark creatures he > cared for in PoA, compared to the way everyone else feels about > losing their pets in that book. Jen: Disposed of dark creatures? I know you will have canon for this Pippin. In my mind when I read POA, I immediately assumed the dark creatures were released into the Forbidden Forest or given to Hagrid to find good homes ;). Now, I have no canon for that, just pointing out where my imagination took me based on my perception of the character. Pippin: > Of course Lupin isn't wholly evil, nobody is. Evil in the Potterverse > is a *social* problem. You can't pin it down to one person. The > Death Eaters as individuals aren't altogether evil, even > Voldemort is not, but the Death Eaters as a group definitely are. > And Lupin is one of them, or I'm a hobbit. Jen: JKR seems to view evil as a choice problem more than anything. A concious choice to pursue a worldview, a community and a doctrine that gives rise to oppression, prejudice, and corrupt or extremist activities. So far Lupin has not been indicted as one of these people. We have no evidence Lupin has engaged in pure-blood ideaology, Muggle torture, employment within a corrupt government, or affiliation with people engaging in nefarious activities. Jen Reese From Vivamus at TaprootTech.com Thu Dec 2 23:18:41 2004 From: Vivamus at TaprootTech.com (Vivamus) Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 18:18:41 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Knowing it was Snape (was: What has Snape seen) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200412021819722.SM01064@devbox> No: HPFGUIDX 119107 > SSSusan: > >>I don't understand why Snape has to be IN each memory. I have all > kinds of memories of people and places and events, and > sometimes the pictures I have in my mind are of those *other* > people and places: > my grandfather smoking a pipe; my mom & dad playing tennis; > my brother graduating from med school. I'm in the audience, > as it were, and I don't believe that if someone accessed my > memories they'd see ME; rather, they'd see those other > individuals *as I saw them*, but I'd be nowhere in sight.<< > > Eloise: > > The way that JKR deals with Pensieve "memories" is a bit > odd, though. > > When Harry dips his head into Dumbledore's Pensieve, he > witness the > > hearings as if he himself were there, not from Dumbledore's own > > perspective, in fact he *sees* Dumbledore there. > > If he were truly inside Dumbledore's own recollection then a) he > > wouldn't be seeing Dubledore himself and b) (more > crucially) he would > > know Dumbledore's thoughts at the time. In the same way, he > sees Tom > > Riddle when he accesses his memories via the Diary. In > other words the > > memories all seem to be narrated in the third person rather > than the > > first person and also are without the emotional resonances and > > personal insights that our own memories have for us. > > > SSSusan: > Right, I agree about the pensieve. But what I was talking > about were the memories Harry accessed during Occlumency > lessons, not those memories he experienced when he dipped his > head into the pensieve. > It's the snippets of memories he got directly from Snape that > we had been talking about and which I was saying shouldn't > require the person himself to be a participant in. Does that > make sense? > > I think Casey may have had the right question, whether > *Harry* was in each of the memory snippets Snape accessed > during Occlumency. If he was, I'll be more inclined to concede. > > Siriusly Snapey Susan Vivamus: I wonder if it is perhaps less complicated than any of that. Can you really put yourself in another person's shoes, however much you might like to? When Harry looked in Snape's mind (and in the pensieve in Snape's memories, and in the pensieve in DD's memories, and in TR's diary) he was not in the body of the person, for the simple reason that he wasn't that person. When Snape burst into Harry's mind, the memories were first person, IN Harry's body, because it was from Harry's point of view we were looking. The only exception to this I can bring to mind is when he is looking out of LV's eyes, either in person or in the snake. But he and LV are deeply and mysteriously connected, and we really don't know how yet. Hmm, perhaps his pov in those circumstances IS significant in some way we haven't been told. From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 2 23:46:31 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 23:46:31 -0000 Subject: Hogwarts letters Re: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119108 Snow wrote : "Could Hermione or any child from a muggle background survive in the muggle world, I would tend to agree that they could, if they wanted to! None of the muggle background children that we have met have been discouraged from attending Hogwarts and none have considered going home even after the basilisk incident where muggles were the prime target." Del replies : This is *precisely* the heart of my problem : ALL the Muggleborns we see are absolutely delighted to live in the WW, and firmly intend to stay there. This is statistically and psychologically impossible, unless they had a VERY compelling reason to all think the same way. So far, the only reason I've been offered that comes close to being compelling is : because the WW is so great. Well, it doesn't look so great to me, so I'm wondering why it seems to look so great to ALL those kids. My personal idea of that compelling reason is : because things seem easier there. The kids see adults do things magically, without any apparent effort, and of course they like that. They just have to sit at the table, and their dinner appears magically out of nowhere. People can apparently turn anything into anything else. They can make things fly, or other cool things. But as they grow up, the kids realise that things aren't that simple. All those spells have to be learned. Not everybody can have a House-Elf. Not everything can be created out of nowhere, or transformed into something else. They also discover that there's a dark side to the wonder : people can control or impersonate you, potions and hexes can do horrible things to you, magical creatures and people aren't necessarily that cool to work with, some people consider Muggleborns as second-class citizens, and so on. But it's almost too late to change their mind by the time they discover all that. Going back to the Muggle World would imply making huge efforts to hide their magic, and to catch up on all the training they didn't get. Considering that apparent easiness is what got them to enthusiastically jump into the WW, I doubt many of them would even consider making the efforts necessary to live a Muggle life, even if they wanted to. So I stand by what I said before : the Muggleborn kids who go to Hogwarts don't truly expand their world, they just exchange one world for another, and there's almost no going back. Now Kim chimes in: After reading through this thread, here's my 2 cents FWIW. I don't think the Muggle-borns would ever choose one world exclusively over the other: in any way possible, they would keep one foot firmly planted in each world. Just put yourself in Hermione's (or Seamus's) shoes. She obviously loves her Muggle parents and they know about and accept their daughter's magical abilities and the WW she inhabits most of the year, even though they aren't part of it, strictly speaking. Every summer Hermione goes home to her parents, not because it's especially "cool" in the Muggle world (though there may be things that she loves as much about the MW as she does about the WW), but because she loves her parents. And perhaps she even had Muggle friends (before the age of 11?) and may have other Muggle relatives that she would badly miss if she ended up living almost exclusively in the WW. Granted we don't know many details about Hermione's life outside of Hogwarts and we may never know more than we do now. So do I *really* know what I'm talking about? No. As far as Muggleborns hiding their magic, they only have to lock their wands away in a trunk when they visit the Muggle world in order to keep themselves from inadvertantly practicing magic in front of unsuspecting Muggles who might not understand.... But, hey, what about all us Muggles out here who would be delighted to know there was a witch or wizard in our midst... ;-)? I think the Muggleborns actually have an advantage over pureblood wizard kids (including even nice ones like the Weasleys), as someone probably already pointed out, since they can adapt to both non-magical and magical circumstances in life if need be, whereas a wizard kid would be a total fish out of water outside of the WW. It's kind of like kids in the RW who are bilingual (often due to their parents being immigrants) -- it's a good thing, it can make them broader-minded, stronger, even wiser, in my opinion. It seems to me too that deep down, and it may never show up in the books, JKR may want some sort of reconciliation to occur between the wizard and muggle worlds. The two worlds lived in some sort of harmony many years ago, didn't they, before the witch burnings and other reasons drove the two camps apart and the witches and wizards chose to go into "hiding" for their own safety. But also in a different thread recently, we discussed how the population of the WW is not exactly going up, so if the two worlds don't make some kind of re-connection, it seems that sooner or later there won't be any more wizards left. Well, not pure-bloods anyway. Actually pure-bloods are rapidly becoming a thing of the past. And the more non-pureblood witches and wizards there are (and non-purebloods would already be in the majority now, I think), the greater the chances of a reconciliation (IMO). Actually it's inevitable (also IMO). Though I'm no population expert, I think such a thing is a fact of life in the natural world -- interbreed (i.e. adapt) or die! Cheers, Kim From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Fri Dec 3 00:10:18 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 00:10:18 -0000 Subject: Hermione's Time Turner In-Reply-To: <200412020808152.SM01064@devbox> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119109 Valky wrote: > has anyone, for example, referenced GOF for the moment that > > the twins actually first appeared at the Burrow on the day of the QWC. If they had time turned I am sure there would be some kind of hint of them appearing to be in two places at once. I don't have GOF here at the moment, and Oh I am missing it right now with all this interesting conversation going on, perhaps I need a second copy. > > Vivamus: > Actually, I *don't* think they used a time turner. I think they used something in a related area of magic, but different. A real Time Turner would be almost impossible for even the Weasley twins to get. > Valky: Ahhhh, very good Vivamus, do you suppose that F and G invented a sweet for the purpose. That would be remarkable and certainly not beyond them. I really don't have GOF at the moment, my Brother-in-Law is taking a long time reading it, and it's really frustrating that I can't investigate this excellent lead myself. From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Fri Dec 3 00:45:06 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 00:45:06 -0000 Subject: Harry's Protection (was Re: Questions) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119110 > > Kneasy: > > > I posted (a few months back) that the 'Ancient Magic' that protects Harry is only effective against Voldemort > > > > Valky: > > Yes I agree with you Kneasy, I believe the blood protection and the surge that repelled Vernon Dursley are not the same power. The > > former being the force that caused Quirrelmorts *hands to burn* and the latter, perhaps a completely different power that the Dark Lord knows *not*. > > > > > > Kneasy: > Hum. I've been remiss in not making my thinking clear, it seems. > I don't think the 'Ancient Magic' and the 'blood protection' are the same thing. I kind of get the impression you do - correct me if I'm wrong. > > OK. Rough outline of what I think we've got/had so far: > > 1. Ancient Magic: this is what blew Voldy's mind at GH, caused > Quirrell to go to pieces and was nullified in the graveyard. > It is/was specific against the *physical* Voldemort/Voldy!Possessed > *only*. And it no longer works. Voldy can touch him. > > 2. Blood protection: a separate magic that protects Harry within > the confines of his relative's home *only*. No clear instance of how it works, but it possibly keeps Harry safe from the attentions of > DEs and other wizards who wish him ill *while he is at home*. > Valky: Yes you are correct, I had seen the Ancient magic and the Blood protection as the same thing, or at least as one being the direct counterpart of the other. So when you said ancient magic I assumed you also meant blood protection. Kneasy: > 3. 'Automatic' wandless magic. Protects Harry from harm that > might come from non-magical sources, i.e. Vernon, school gangs. > May be innate in all wizards, not just Harry. Works anywhere. > > It may seem a comprehensive set of shielding, but there are gaps > that nasty stuff can creep through, hence the Little Whinging > Dementors. They were not Voldy, not attacking while he was > physically in the Dursley house, and they were magical. None of > the protections applied. > Valky: I am on the same page now. Thanks Kneasy: > Similarly, it should be possible for, say Bella to attack him in the street, but not while he is in the house. I believe that the blood protection is still working. Inside No. 4 Privet Drive he would still be safe from Voldy, despite the fact that the Ancient Magic has now been overcome, otherwise why keep sending him back there? > Valky: Yes I agree, except that it casts a shadow over Voldies assumption that *he* had overcome it, by taking Harry's blood. I know it's wise to accept the simple explanation, but I am finding that difficult. I need to extricate one result from the other and see the difference between them, if you understand what I am saying. > > > > > Valky: > > Yes, here is the crux of my investigation. We are given the prophecy in OOtP and we are told that Harry has a power that the Dark Lord does *not* know of. I expect quite some foreshadowing of this power in action has also been given to us through the course of the series. > all that has been thoroughly discussed by DD, Voldemort and Harry is the *touch* of his skin bearing the protection of his mothers love. > > > > Kneasy: > Yep. That power. Something else again, I think - and separate from > the various protections. Everyone wants to know what it is and how > it can crunch Voldy. > Valky: Now I think I see here that you are considering the *touch* of Harry's skin to be the power that Voldemort does not know. DD says in GOF something like 'hmm yes he has overcome *that particular* obstacle. Meaning he can now touch Harry. Then in OOtP Voldemort encounters the unbearable *touch* of Love *inside* Harry, so I see what you mean. Outside, Inside, then where? > Kneasy: > It must be something specific to Harry. > The only thing that Harry has that no-one else has is a bit of Voldy in his mind. It's the only thing that can't be replicated by DD. This is why I spent so much time whittering on about Possession. > To be boring: IMO Voldy is a combination of Tom and Salazar > essence/spirit, call it what you may. Harry is a combination of > Harry and Voldy. If Harry can force Voldy from inside his mind, then Tom could follow his example and force Sally from his. I think Tom and Sally have a pact, probably involving power and immortality, DD knows it and that's why he keeps appealing to Tom rather than Voldy, and tells him there are worse things than death - eternal slavery, maybe. Valky: I like that your theory correlates the purpose of the founders. I agree that Hogwarts' destiny, and Harry's are intertwined in some way. So though I don't agree with *everything* you say, I think it's rather likely that Voldemort has some *present* connection to Sally, and that it will come into play. But you didn't want anyone to agree with you, did you, oops. :D > Valky: > > There are two other mysteries about Harry's protection, one is the protection of the Durselys home, and the other is the *impossible to hold by the throat (strangle)* Harry. > > > > Kneasy: > Not quite impossible to hold by the throat. > Sirius was doing quite well in trying to throttle Harry in the Shrieking Shack. It took a kick from Hermione to make him let go. Valky: Oooh, darn it, I really need my books back!! I would like to see that passage for myself, that's very important to my dig. Can anyone, please, quote it for me... Gosh I am sorry to be asking for so many quotes. > By splitting the protection into various specificities JKR has enlarged the playground. One comprehensive protection would be a bit boring IMO. It would make Harry too safe - certainly for my tastes. > > But it still doesn't explain why DD was so pleased. > In fact I've posited that removal of the anti-Voldy spell has made Harry a lot more vulnerable. It's removed any restraints on that bit in his mind. Valky: Hence requiring Harry to become what he needs to be. A kind of tough love thing, and therefore the gleam means that LV doesn't know he has helped Harry unleash the potential. Kneasy: > It's why he was so open to Voldy thoughts and images in OoP, it's why he seems such an unpleasant character in OoP. > The Voldy influence is growing from the inside. > It'll be interesting to see how Harry and DD deal with it. Valky: It will be interesting to see if Harry invades LV willingly, don't you think. From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Thu Dec 2 19:27:29 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 11:27:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fat Friar (was ghosts, magicians and babies was Re: Questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041202192729.42359.qmail@web53109.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119111 > > Elanor Pam: > > The Fat Friar was a friar - but he was also a > > wizard (well, he's HufflePuff's ghost, so I > > assume he was). > > Potioncat: > How did he become both? According to JKR the ghosts > were in the house they now haunt. If FF was at > Hogwarts from 11--17, when did he go to the monestary? Juli: What if instead of being a wizard and a friar he was just a wizard who by some reason got the nickname of fat friar? Juli From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Thu Dec 2 19:59:22 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 11:59:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: OOP: The unknown power In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041202195922.76265.qmail@web53110.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119112 > SSSusan: ...edited... > There are so many people who remark about wanting > the force to *not* be love. My particular favorite > choice for the power is Sacrificial Love, but I > won't go into that right now. > > I do have a question for Juli or anyone else who > objects to Love being the power: How did you handle > the denouement of SS/PS? DD explained then the reason > Quirrell couldn't touch Harry, and the reason was the > Love which resides in Harry's skin, there because of > his mother's sacrifice. If Love seems so corny, why > stick with the series? And, please, I don't mean the > question to be disrespectful! Juli Replies: I must accept that when I read the talk between DD and Harry about the prophecy and all that my first thought was that the power is love, and JKR has given us many clues about it, she did say that LV has never loved anyone, so he doesn't have any love. Harry on the other hand was deeply loved by his parents, enough to die for him, so of course he's got tons of love in his blood. But... something just doesn't feel right, it's just like the bad guy in a movie where at the end the hero just says "I love you" and all of a sudden he's not evil anymore. I just expect so more from JKR and the HP saga. I wouldn't like it if after all these years of obsession it came up to "All you need is Love", I love the Beatles but I want HP to be a more than Love is Great. As for SSSusan's question, I didn't have a problem with the reason why Quirrell couldn't touch Harry in PS/SS, it was a nice reason, but as I've said, I expect more. Juli From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Fri Dec 3 01:01:26 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 01:01:26 -0000 Subject: Slytherin House again. Was: Re: Problem with OotP? (was: Pampering) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119113 Alla wrote : " Are we supposed to IMAGINE for example that there is a good Slytherin, if Jo does not show us one?" Del replies : If there's indeed a good Slytherin, then none of the DA knows him. He would have been a very useful addition to the DA, especially after the creation of the IQ, as he could have tried to spy on them in the Slytherin common room. Alla wrote : "Well, OK, you are basically saying that those children with potential to "go bad" so to speak are grouped in Slytherin to give him help and to stop them from doing bad. My point and Del's point was that we don't see anybody helping them out at all." Del replies : I can go even further than that, and argue that putting them in a separate House is the best way to ensure that they will NOT get help. They don't have the examples of "better" kids around them in their own House, and when they do interact with those better kids, it's in an atmosphere of *competition*, of *rivalry*, which is the best way to ensure that they will NOT want to emulate those better students. For example : Ron and Harry can learn about working hard on their exams from Hermione, because they spend their evenings with her. Draco, on the other hand, is jealous of Hermione because she is better than he is, but he can't learn from her how to obtain the same kind of results because he never interacts with her in that way. Another example : in PS/SS, Harry is allowed to join the Quidditch team, even though he's a first-year. This smacks of favouritism right from the beginning of the year. But let's say some Slytherins decide that it's not favouritism, it's just... (Hm. It's just what, exactly?). And then comes the end of the year. Slytherin has worked hard and they are in the lead. And then out of nowhere comes a shower of points for Gryffindor, all of them related to Harry Potter. Sure, some recognition was due to Harry and the others, but did DD have to give them just enough points to beat Slytherin ? Once again it smacks of favouritism. Considering that the Slytherin kids are supposed to be ambitious and that many of them seem to have shaky morals, what is that kind of attitude from the school staff supposed to teach them ?? Del From nienna_anwamane at ntlworld.com Thu Dec 2 21:03:32 2004 From: nienna_anwamane at ntlworld.com (nienna_anwamane) Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 21:03:32 -0000 Subject: Phineas, 'least popular' / Snape (Re: Slytherin) References: Message-ID: <004901c4d8b2$66e9e780$e14dfea9@talyn> No: HPFGUIDX 119114 Renee: > Thanks for correcting me! But I'm not sure which of the two is > more damning... I don't know, some of the best teachers I ever had weren't popular but I learnt more from them than I ever did from the younger more popular teachers. (And so I'm not completely OT) Snape is not a popular teacher or even a nice one, but I think it's likely that the Hogwarts students that learned from him are more advanced. Phineas Nigellus might not have been the most loved head Hogwarts ever had, but so what? They can't all be Dumbledore offering sweets and twinkling eyes. "nienna_anwamane" From klevasseur at earthlink.net Thu Dec 2 23:42:52 2004 From: klevasseur at earthlink.net (ms_luna_knows) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 23:42:52 -0000 Subject: Who's the HBP? (Re: "Prince" in HBP) In-Reply-To: <20041202020326.87293.qmail@web51404.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119115 > doddiemoemoe wrote: > > At this time, I simply cannot think of anyone JKR has given > > enough background on that may be the HBP.. > > Harriet wrote: > can I suggest the HBP could be Lupin? He is a > half-blood I believe. I believe that the HBP is a new character, that is somehow related to a known character in the story. Possibly one of those uppity "purebloods", a "love" child perhaps of one of the DE's who works with Harry and Co. against the DE's. It would be an interesting twist!! ;-) Karen From dontask2much at yahoo.com Fri Dec 3 01:13:23 2004 From: dontask2much at yahoo.com (charme) Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 20:13:23 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Harry's Protection (was Re: Questions) References: Message-ID: <005d01c4d8d5$49960a60$6701a8c0@MITRE.ORG> No: HPFGUIDX 119116 >>Kneasy: >> By splitting the protection into various specificities JKR has > enlarged the playground. One comprehensive protection would be a bit > boring IMO. It would make Harry too safe - certainly for my tastes. >> >> But it still doesn't explain why DD was so pleased. >> In fact I've posited that removal of the anti-Voldy spell has made > Harry a lot more vulnerable. It's removed any restraints on that bit > in his mind. > > Valky: > Hence requiring Harry to become what he needs to be. A kind of tough > love thing, and therefore the gleam means that LV doesn't know he > has helped Harry unleash the potential. > > > Kneasy: >> It's why he was so open to Voldy thoughts and images in OoP, it's > why he seems such an unpleasant character in OoP. >> The Voldy influence is growing from the inside. >> It'll be interesting to see how Harry and DD deal with it. > > Valky: > It will be interesting to see if Harry invades LV willingly, don't > you think. > charme: Ou! Pick me, my hand is up!!! :) Valky has it to my way of thinking as it will be most interesting to see if Harry tries to willingly push his mind on Voldemort. I mean, it must have come as a teensy shock to LV when he discovered that Harry could "see" thru him. Instead of fretting about it, LV chose to use this to his advantage at the end of OoP. He may have made some oversights in the pasts, but he is nonetheless pretty resourceful. It does make me curious if Harry might be able to turn that advantage back his way, since he didn't have to try to "see" through LV. If that can be mastered, it's possible Harry might even be potentially more powerful than LV from that "mind" perspective in any case From harriet_lupin at yahoo.com Fri Dec 3 00:17:43 2004 From: harriet_lupin at yahoo.com (Marianne Adams) Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 16:17:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: Book Two Discoveries! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041203001743.84350.qmail@web51403.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119117 Jim wrote: > I throw out a theory for scrutiny. Late in Book 2, Dumbledore makes > clear that Riddle "is" (emphasis in the book itself, Scholastic, > bottom of p. 332) the last remaining ancestor of Slytherin ... could > Harry turn out to be the last remaining ancestor of Godric Gryffindor, > with his lineage to Gryffindor (the half-blood prince) disclosed in > Book 6 as an added reason for the till-the-death rivalry between > Voldemort and Potter? Perhaps the Chamber contains a record of a curse > between Gryffindor and Slytherin connected with their parting of the > ways, with the curse to be resolved by the eventual extinction of one > of their lines of ancestry at the hands of the other! Sorry if this thread is no longer going but I have a couple of ideas of what JKR is talking about when she says that there are things that Harry learns in Chamber that foreshadows what he will find out in Prince.... 1. the Parseltongue thing 2. the Sword of Godric Gryffindor that Harry received when he was fighting the basilisk (I guess that's a discovery, right....?) 3. the fact that Voldy transferred some of his powers to Harry when he tried to kill him as a baby and gave him that scar. 1 and 3 tie in together since Parseltongue is one of the things that Voldy gave to Harry that day. I think number 2 refers to the discovery that Harry will make in Prince that he is the true heir to Godric Gryffindor.... and the last remaining heir as well. I hope this is what you were talking about. Harriet From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Fri Dec 3 01:40:19 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 01:40:19 -0000 Subject: Hogwarts letters Re: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119118 Kim wrote: "Just put yourself in Hermione's (or Seamus's) shoes. She obviously loves her Muggle parents and they know about and accept their daughter's magical abilities and the WW she inhabits most of the year, even though they aren't part of it, strictly speaking. Every summer Hermione goes home to her parents, not because it's especially "cool" in the Muggle world (though there may be things that she loves as much about the MW as she does about the WW), but because she loves her parents. And perhaps she even had Muggle friends (before the age of 11?) and may have other Muggle relatives that she would badly miss if she ended up living almost exclusively in the WW. Granted we don't know many details about Hermione's life outside of Hogwarts and we may never know more than we do now." Del replies : In GoF, Hermione cut short her summer holidays with her parents by two weeks, to attend the QWC. Then she didn't go back home for the Christmas holidays (Yule Ball). I don't remember about the Easter holiday, but I don't think she went back home either. Then comes OoP. Apparently she went to GP very early in July, and remained there all summer. Then, for the Christmas holidays, she had plans to go skiing with her parents, but she came straight to GP instead. It doesn't seem to me that there's anyone or anything she misses really badly in the MW. And we almost never see her writing to her parents or to any Muggle friends or family. We never hear her talking about them either. As for Dean, we know that he hasn't even told his parents about Cedric's death, and presumably about LV's rebirth either. And he too, if I remember well, cut his holidays short in GoF to go and see the QWC. Kim wrote : "As far as Muggleborns hiding their magic, they only have to lock their wands away in a trunk when they visit the Muggle world in order to keep themselves from inadvertantly practicing magic in front of unsuspecting Muggles who might not understand...." Del replies : What about when Muggle people visit them ? How do they hide all the magical artefacts, the highly suspicious books, the cloaks and robes and so on ? And when they visit Muggle people with their children, how do they prevent those children from talking about magic ? And what do they discuss with the Muggles (unless they keep tabs on what happens in both worlds, like DD, but that's a lot of work) ? I'm not saying it's impossible, I'm just saying it's very complicated. Kim wrote : "But, hey, what about all us Muggles out here who would be delighted to know there was a witch or wizard in our midst... ;-)?" Del replies : Forbidden by the Statute of Secrecy if I remember well :-) Kim wrote : "I think the Muggleborns actually have an advantage over pureblood wizard kids (including even nice ones like the Weasleys), as someone probably already pointed out, since they can adapt to both non-magical and magical circumstances in life if need be, whereas a wizard kid would be a total fish out of water outside of the WW." Del replies : You have a point there, of course. Just looking at how more at ease Tonks is in the MW, compared to, say, Molly and Arthur, is a proof of that. By the way : do we know that Moody is wizard-born ? Because he seems quite at ease in the MW too, so I'm wondering if he couldn't be Muggleborn. Not that it matters anyway, I'm just wondering. Kim wrote : "It's kind of like kids in the RW who are bilingual (often due to their parents being immigrants) -- it's a good thing, it can make them broader-minded, stronger, even wiser, in my opinion." Del replies : Then my son is going to be a fountain of wisdom :-D He's barely 2, and he's learning 3 languages at once, plus 2 additional ones waiting in line. Kim wrote : " It seems to me too that deep down, and it may never show up in the books, JKR may want some sort of reconciliation to occur between the wizard and muggle worlds." Del replies : I seem to remember that she said in an interview that this would never happen, that the separation between the two worlds was too deep. Del From Lynx412 at AOL.com Fri Dec 3 01:59:45 2004 From: Lynx412 at AOL.com (Lynx412 at AOL.com) Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 20:59:45 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] The silver hand (Was: The Darkness Within) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119119 In a message dated 12/1/2004 7:44:12 PM Eastern Standard Time, justcarol67 at yahoo.com writes: > Carol, who thinks that if there's a conflict between Pettigrew and > werewolf!Lupin, Pettigrew will win That's a logical conclusion, however, given the Marauders pattern [as well as one can be formed with only two points]. Note the way the names are listed on the map: Moony, Wormtail, Padfoot, & Prongs. Now consider the order in which they died. Prongs first, then Padfoot. so, if this is a pattern, the next to die is Wormtail. That doesn't preclude him doing mortal damage to Moony first, though. The Other Cheryl [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From jferer at yahoo.com Fri Dec 3 02:21:57 2004 From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 02:21:57 -0000 Subject: Book Two Discoveries! In-Reply-To: <20041203001743.84350.qmail@web51403.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119120 Jim: "I throw out a theory for scrutiny. Late in Book 2, Dumbledore makes clear that Riddle "is" (emphasis in the book itself, Scholastic, bottom of p. 332) the last remaining ancestor of Slytherin ... could Harry turn out to be the last remaining ancestor of Godric Gryffindor, with his lineage to Gryffindor (the half-blood prince) disclosed in Book 6 as an added reason for the till-the-death rivalry between Voldemort and Potter?" JKR should have said "descendant." The Heir of Gryffindor concept has been popular for a long time. The Sword of Gryffindor is just one of the items that suggest it; the red and gold sparks that Harry shot out of his soon-to-be wand is another. There's no proof for it, but the arguments are persuasive; but I've always had a problem with the theory on general principles. The wizard world intermarries a lot, and by averages there should be Heirs of Gryffindor all over the place. You'd expect you could find, after a thousand years, people who were heirs of all four Founders at once. Our world, the Muggle world, is a world where Ronald Reagan and Jimmy Carter were sixth cousins. We're all more closely related than we think. Even with the "intellectual" problems with it, I wouldn't be surprised whatsoever if the Heir of Gryffindor theory turned out true. Jim Ferer From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 3 02:31:11 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 02:31:11 -0000 Subject: Slytherin House again. Was: Re: Problem with OotP? (was: Pampering) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119121 > Alla wrote earlier: > " Are we supposed to IMAGINE for example that there is a good > Slytherin, if Jo does not show us one?" > > Del replies : > If there's indeed a good Slytherin, then none of the DA knows him. He would have been a very useful addition to the DA, especially after the creation of the IQ, as he could have tried to spy on them in the Slytherin common room. Alla: Well, yes, but other houses do not socialise with Slyths much, right? So, I will still believe if in the next books "good" Slytherins or Slytherins show up unexpectedly. Theo, where are you? > > Del replies : I can go even further than that, and argue that putting them in a separate House is the best way to ensure that they will NOT get help.They don't have the examples of "better" kids around them in their own House, and when they do interact with those better kids, it's in an atmosphere of *competition*, of *rivalry*, which is the best way to ensure that they will NOT want to emulate those better students. Alla: Yep, House Rivalry is fun, but you still need interactions with "good kids" in non-confrontational setting to learn something from them. Del: And then comes the end of the year. Slytherin has worked > hard and they are in the lead. And then out of nowhere comes a shower of points for Gryffindor, all of them related to Harry Potter. Sure, some recognition was due to Harry and the others, but did DD have to give them just enough points to beat Slytherin ? Once again it smacks of favouritism. Considering that the Slytherin kids are supposed to be ambitious and that many of them seem to have shaky morals, what is that kind of attitude from the school staff supposed to teach them ?? Alla: On this particular incident we diverge, as you probably know. I believe that fighting Voldie called for A LOT of points being awarded. It may even call for the hOuse winning the cup. I do agree though that Dumbledore did not need to snitch the victory from Slyths right in front of them. The point should have been awarded before the feast, IMO. I am also not sure about teachers prejudice against Slytherins in general. Before Harry came to school, they did win the Cup for seven times after all. Does not sound to me as if Dumbledore does not allow them to be recognised. From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 3 02:48:52 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 02:48:52 -0000 Subject: Hogwarts letters Re: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119122 Del wrote: In GoF, Hermione cut short her summer holidays with her parents by two weeks, to attend the QWC. Then she didn't go back home for the Christmas holidays (Yule Ball). I don't remember about the Easter holiday, but I don't think she went back home either. Then comes OoP. Apparently she went to GP very early in July, and remained there all summer. Then, for the Christmas holidays, she had plans to go skiing with her parents, but she came straight to GP instead. It doesn't seem to me that there's anyone or anything she misses really badly in the MW. And we almost never see her writing to her parents or to any Muggle friends or family. We never hear her talking about them either. Kim responds: Cut short or not, she did spend at least part of her holidays with her muggle parents. And I still think we don't know enough about Hermione's life outside Hogwarts or her relationship with her parents or other family to know what she'll do in the long run to reconcile the two worlds she's part of (and she *is* part of two worlds, like it or not). I think JKR has left out most of the details of the muggle side of Hermione's life on purpose, also like it or not, because JKR is focusing the story on her hero, Harry. Anyhow, as you describe, Hermione may be eager these days to get back to Hogwarts as soon as possible because, being a teenage girl, she's got a desperate crush on.... Uh oh, better steer clear of "ships" on this list ;-) Anyway, my point is, she's a kid now, but what will she do if/when she marries someone? (granted, if/when that day comes, he's bound to be a wizard, not a Muggle). She may well have a baby or two one day, and I doubt that she'll just cut her Muggle mom and dad out of the equation then because they don't fit into the WW. But you're right, if I interpret your ideas correctly, Hermione does seem to view the WW as far more important to her at this time in her life. Also though, I do recall Hermione talking about her parents in passing on several occasions, and they've come to Diagon Alley with her and picked her up at the train station, so they are significant to her, but they're just not written about in detail. Kim wrote: As far as Muggleborns hiding their magic, they only have to lock their wands away in a trunk when they visit the Muggle world in order to keep themselves from inadvertantly practicing magic in front of unsuspecting Muggles who might not understand.... Del replied: What about when Muggle people visit them? How do they hide all the magical artefacts, the highly suspicious books, the cloaks and robes and so on? And when they visit Muggle people with their children, how do they prevent those children from talking about magic? And what do they discuss with the Muggles (unless they keep tabs on what happens in both worlds, like DD, but that's a lot of work)? I'm not saying it's impossible, I'm just saying it's very complicated. Kim replies: I agree, it's complicated. Well, here's a stab at a kind of answer. Suppose Hermione decides to *live* in the WW once she graduates Hogwarts (provided she doesn't get killed in the coming battles... sniff). I admit she's likely to live in the WW and not the Muggle world. But she'll go as often as she likes to the MW to visit her parents, bringing her boyfriend, husband, significant other, kids, etc. to visit mom and pop, just like out-of-town families do in the real world. She might bring along her wand and a few magical items just in case (in case of what, you might ask? I don't know!) The point of visiting Muggleland and the main draw for Hermione would be her loved ones, and she'll have plenty to talk to them about, and nothing to hide since they know about and accept magic. And I don't suppose the Muggle neighbors would be likely invites to a semi-annual Granger family gathering, would you? But then again, aren't there other Muggles like Hermione's parents out there, who either have wizarding children of their own or would be very open-minded on the subject? No need to be entirely paranoid about muggle attitudes towards magical people (no, I'm not saying you're paranoid at all, I'm just conjecturing). Kim wrote: But, hey, what about all us Muggles out here who would be delighted to know there was a witch or wizard in our midst... ;-)? Del replied: Forbidden by the Statute of Secrecy if I remember well :-) Kim replies: They've just got to revamp their system of laws IMO... ;-) Del asked: By the way: do we know that Moody is wizard-born? Because he seems quite at ease in the MW too, so I'm wondering if he couldn't be Muggleborn. Not that it matters anyway, I'm just wondering. Kim replies: Never thought about that, but that's an interesting question. Moody is such an odd guy that it never occurred to me to wonder about his family background. I keep getting distracted by that whirling eye of his. Del wrote: Then my son is going to be a fountain of wisdom :-D He's barely 2, and he's learning 3 languages at once, plus 2 additional ones waiting in line. Kim now: That's great! But then I'm a bit partial to language learning myself :-) Seriously, I think it can broaden a person's outlook like few things can. Kim wrote: It seems to me too that deep down, and it may never show up in the books, JKR may want some sort of reconciliation to occur between the wizard and muggle worlds. Del replied: I seem to remember that she said in an interview that this would never happen, that the separation between the two worlds was too deep. Kim asks: If you can find that quote, please let me know. Cheers, Kim From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 3 03:02:25 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 03:02:25 -0000 Subject: Hogwarts letters Re: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119123 > Del replied: > I seem to remember that she said in an interview that this would neve happen, that the separation between the two worlds was too deep. > Kim asks: > If you can find that quote, please let me know. Alla: Here you go, Kim. This is from March 2004 Chat. "Calliope: Are the Muggle and Magical worlds ever going to be rejoined? JK Rowling replies -> No, the breach was final, although as book six shows, the Muggles are noticing more and more odd happenings now that Voldemort's back." From antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com Fri Dec 3 03:22:42 2004 From: antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com (antoshachekhonte) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 03:22:42 -0000 Subject: Book Two Discoveries! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119124 Jim Ferer: > JKR should have said "descendant." The Heir of Gryffindor concept has > been popular for a long time. The Sword of Gryffindor is just one of > the items that suggest it; the red and gold sparks that Harry shot out > of his soon-to-be wand is another. > > There's no proof for it, but the arguments are persuasive; but I've > always had a problem with the theory on general principles. The wizard > world intermarries a lot, and by averages there should be Heirs of > Gryffindor all over the place. You'd expect you could find, after a > thousand years, people who were heirs of all four Founders at once. > Our world, the Muggle world, is a world where Ronald Reagan and Jimmy > Carter were sixth cousins. We're all more closely related than we think. > > Even with the "intellectual" problems with it, I wouldn't be surprised > whatsoever if the Heir of Gryffindor theory turned out true. > > Jim Ferer Antosha: I'm leery of the 'Heir of Gryffindor vs. Heir of Slytherin" setup mostly because it seems very... I don't know... unsubtle and schematic. White Hat vs. Black Hat. The world JKR is building up seems to beg more moral complexity than that. I do want to point out, however, that while the WW may be (literally) littered with DESCENDANTS of the Founders, each would have at most a single HEIR. In the same way, Queen Victoria has many living descendants, peers and royals all. But only one of them currently sits on the throne of England. Elizabeth II is Victoria's sole heir. In CoS, it is made clear that Tom Riddle is not only Salazar Slytherin's HEIR, he is SS's only remaining DESCENDANT, which is pretty wild. Not terribly good breeding stock, that family. Though, given their disposition, this is perhaps not terribly surprising. From antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com Fri Dec 3 03:35:05 2004 From: antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com (antoshachekhonte) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 03:35:05 -0000 Subject: Harry/Riddle In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119125 > Inge: > Im not meaning to say that Harry and Tom live the same life over - Im > thinking more in lines of TimeTurning - but then again not quite. > Something similar. > > What I was trying to say in my first post was that if Harry is Tom > Riddle (time-turned or something the like) - then Dumbledore knows > and tries everything he can to guide Harry in the right direction so > that he will not turn out to become Voldemort over again. > > If Harry manages to remain *good* - then there will be no future *bad > Voldemort*. Voldemort will 'vanish' - into thin air maybe.... > Voldemort (not Riddle)knows this, too, and that is why he needs to > destroy Harry - because if he doesn't that will mean a natural > destruction of Voldemort himself. > I wish I could explain myself in better words - but as I said > earlier - Im not even quite sure myself what Im getting at here.... > only that it makes sense in my head ;-) An interesting thought! It sounds as if you're positing an almost Buddhist idea of a single soul working off its karma until it gets it RIGHT. Hope it's one of the forms of Buddhism that allows for enlightenment within this plane--I'd hate for Harry to have to die at the end of the series. At least, not permanently. ;-) There is--alternately--an interesting theory that was bantered around for a while late this summer that perhaps LV tried to possess Harry before killing him. That a portion of TR is in fact trapped inside Harry. This would explain some of the powers that were transfered into Harry, as well as some of the resonance between the two of them. Also the funny voice (no, not the one that sounds like Hermione, the other one) that Harry sometimes hears, as when he's trying to shake off the Imperio in GoF. According to one version of this theory, that remaining bit of TR's humanity will in fact be the agent for LV's final destruction. Antosha From ryokas at hotmail.com Fri Dec 3 03:47:16 2004 From: ryokas at hotmail.com (kizor0) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 03:47:16 -0000 Subject: Tonks' clumsiness Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119126 Here's an idea that I had while revising the Wikipedia's coverage on Metamorphmagi at four in the morning. Tonks' pretty much biggest characteristic has so far been her clumsiness. While it's completely possible and in fact very likely that it's just an Evans, if we didn't overanalyze it regardless what kind of HPfGU would this be? Tonks can change her appearance at will, and she's very good at it. We don't know the extents, but she can alter body mass and is well capable of looking decades older than she is. Can her clumsiness be linked to this? Being a shape-shifter, Tonks could be running around looking completely different for much of the time. We don't even have proof that her 'real' form is pale, young or female (but let's *not* go there, shall we?). If her powers manifested early on, she probably used them heavily - a child would be fascinated with the ability, and an adolescent who's insecure about her appearance or height would most likely do something about it if given the chance - never gaining the degree of familiarity with any shape that most people have. Possibly, the reason why Tonks is so clumsy is that she's not used to her present body. - Kizor PS. Completely useless fact: I just realized that "Alastor" is one letter away from the Finnish word for "naked". Given JKR's love for word-play, this is quite unfortunate for Finnish readers. From Arcum_Dagsson at celticwind.zzn.com Fri Dec 3 03:59:07 2004 From: Arcum_Dagsson at celticwind.zzn.com (Shanoah Alkire) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 03:59:07 -0000 Subject: Trusting characters Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119127 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > Carol responds: > FWIW, he didn't even apparate in. He arrived on his flying motocycle! > Why, I don't know. Apparation would have been faster and a whole lot > quieter. Did he somehow know that Harry was alive and expect to fly > away with him? If so, how did he know? If not, what was he thinking? > Convenient for Hagrid that he happened to arrive that way, but not > the clearest thinking on Sirius's part. > First off, he probably didn't know the exact situation. He may have expected to have James, Lily, & Harry on the bike, or just wanted to be prepared for anything. The motorcycle may even have defensive capabilities we don't know of. :) Second, we don't honestly have proof that Sirius knows how to apparate. As was brought up in GoF, plenty of wizards don't, or prefer broomsticks, and what with his flying motorcycle, he may fall into this category. He doesn't even seem to have apparated into the ministry on-screen in OoP. Third, the concept of apparation hadn't been introduced until PoA. Dumbledore appears & disappears, but no one else does, and JKR may not have even planned it to be a widely available ability at the time. Minerva doesn't even apparate from Privet Drive in Ch. 1 of PS/SS. In fact, oddly, she never is mentioned leaving Privet Drive at all in Ch. 1, which is interesting in itself... --Arcum From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 3 04:03:21 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 04:03:21 -0000 Subject: Predictions for book 6 and 7. Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119128 I looked through files. I saw predictions for OOP. I did not see any for the upcoming books. I know we played this game, but I did not participated at that time, so I want to make my predictions for HBP and some for book 7 too. Anybody care to join, place any bets? First one I am VERY confident of - 1. Voldemort WILL be destroyed somehow. :o) 2. Harry WILL survive at the end (I would place this one at 50-50, but since I really want this one to happen, I will predict it anyway). 3. Remus Lupin is NOT Voldemort's servant and has never been Voldemort's servant. 4. Peter will help Harry somehow (I don't see this one at all, but I think this is going happen by story logic). 5. Sirius WILL return in some shape or form (I really want him to return as human, but I realise that most likely it will be spirit or portrait or something like that). 6. Harry will think that Snape betrayed the Order in HBP. 7. We will learn in book 7 that Snape did not betray the Order. 8. Harry will forgive Snape. 9. HBP is Remus or Godric Gryffindor. OK, I'll add others later, if I think of anything else. From ryokas at hotmail.com Fri Dec 3 05:02:57 2004 From: ryokas at hotmail.com (kizor0) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 05:02:57 -0000 Subject: Trusting characters Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119129 > Carol responds: > *Snip several reasons behind Hagrid's use of his motorcycle > --Arcum Fourth: We don't know if a person Apparating can bring another person who can't Apparate with him. Fifth: Hagrid hadn't been cleared from the whole Chamber of Secrets business at the time, he had been expelled from Hogwarts, and his wand had been snapped. Perhaps that didn't keep him from doing magic, but try getting a license with those credentials. - Kizor From finwitch at yahoo.com Fri Dec 3 07:25:31 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 07:25:31 -0000 Subject: Predictions for book 6 and 7. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119130 "dumbledore11214: > 1. Voldemort WILL be destroyed somehow. :o) > > 2. Harry WILL survive at the end (I would place this one at 50-50, > but since I really want this one to happen, I will predict it > anyway). > > 3. Remus Lupin is NOT Voldemort's servant and has never been > Voldemort's servant. > > 4. Peter will help Harry somehow (I don't see this one at all, but I > think this is going happen by story logic). > > 5. Sirius WILL return in some shape or form (I really want him to > return as human, but I realise that most likely it will be spirit or > portrait or something like that). > > 6. Harry will think that Snape betrayed the Order in HBP. > > 7. We will learn in book 7 that Snape did not betray the Order. > > 8. Harry will forgive Snape. > > 9. HBP is Remus or Godric Gryffindor. Finwitch agrees with points 1-5 and suspects that Sirius will return as a fairy godfather (all those fairy godmothers in princess fairy tales...) or as a Phoenix or as Padfoot or something completely new. She'll modify points 6-7 to say 'something bad' instead of 'betray the Order', clarify point 8 to say Harry will forgive Snape for what he "did" to Sirius and change 9 to say that HBP is Remus Lupin, Nicolas Flamel or Rubeus Hagrid. She also likes to add: 10. Aberforth Dumbledore will become more important (at least I hope so, he seems interesting as it is). 11. A car accident or Accidental Magic? will happen in the first chapter of HP&tHBP that causes Harry to leave the Dursleys. 12. Harry is terribly upset in the beginning of HP&tHBP, learns to deal with his emotions during the main plot and then uses this ability near the end of the book to defeat something Voldemort is up to. This is partly as he learns Occlumency and Legilemency. 13. Harry uses Legilimency to find out what Aunt Petunia is hiding in Book 7, since she won't answer his questions. 14. Harry will face down Uncle Vernon on his 17th birthday, since he's then of age and therefore allowed to do magic and leaves the Dursleys for good. 15. Harry will learn to Apparate. 16. Weasleys' Wizard Wheezes at 93 Diagon Alley gives great assistance to Harry in his fight against Voldemort. Finwitch From finwitch at yahoo.com Fri Dec 3 07:37:14 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 07:37:14 -0000 Subject: Tonks' clumsiness In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119131 Kizor: > Possibly, the reason why Tonks is so clumsy is that she's not used to > her present body. > > - Kizor > > PS. Completely useless fact: I just realized that "Alastor" is one > letter away from the Finnish word for "naked". Given JKR's love for > word-play, this is quite unfortunate for Finnish readers. Finwitch: Hmm-mm. Maybe both Harry and Neville are shape-shifters, too? We know how Harry can grow his hair overnight, and he never really changed much - but Neville? He's the other clumsy one. Maybe - maybe Neville's one too? though Neville's probably clumsy because he tries to be *Careful*... And that Alastor - Alaston thing... well, you could as well be naked to Alastor with that eye of his. Finwitch From gbannister10 at aol.com Fri Dec 3 07:54:31 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 07:54:31 -0000 Subject: Harry's Protection (was Re: Questions) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119132 > > Valky: > > > There are two other mysteries about Harry's protection, one is > the protection of the Durselys home, and the other is the > *impossible to hold by the throat (strangle)* Harry. > > > > > > Kneasy: > > Not quite impossible to hold by the throat. > > Sirius was doing quite well in trying to throttle Harry in the > Shrieking Shack. It took a kick from Hermione to make him let go. Geoff: The point is, of course, that Sirius was not trying to harm Harry but was acting in self-defence. 'He had forgotten about magic - he had forgotten that he was short and skinny and thirteen whereas Black was a tall full-grown man. All Harry knew was that he wanted to hurt Black as badly as he could and that he didn't care howmuch he got hurt in return.... Hermione was screaming; Ron was yelling; there was a blinding flash as the wands in Black's hand sent into the air a jet of sparks which missed Harry's face by inches; Harry felt the shrunken arm under his fingers twisting madly but he clung on, his other hand punching every part of Black it could find. But Black's free hand had found Harry's throat - "No," he hissed, "I've waited too long - " The fingers tightened, Harry choked, his glasses askew. The he saw Hermione's foot swing out of nowhere. Black let go of Harry with a grunt of pain.' (POA "Cat, Rat and Dog" pp.249/50 UK edition) Although Harry does not realise it, Sirius is doing this to try to stop Harry's frenzied attack and protect himself. Does the protective magic have, so to speak, some innate ability to sense that the attack is not an attempt on Harry's life? As Ollivander would say, "Curious....." From azriona at juno.com Fri Dec 3 08:09:42 2004 From: azriona at juno.com (Sharon) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 08:09:42 -0000 Subject: Hermione's Time Turner In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119133 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "M.Clifford" wrote: > > Valky wrote: > > has anyone, for example, referenced GOF for the moment that > > > the twins actually first appeared at the Burrow on the day of > the QWC. If they had time turned I am sure there would be some kind > of hint of them appearing to be in two places at once. I don't have > GOF here at the moment, and Oh I am missing it right now with all > this interesting conversation going on, perhaps I need a second copy. Bit confused over what part you want - Fred & George woke up at the Burrow the morning that they all go to the campsite, and travel by Portkey with the rest of the family (as they don't have their Apparating License at that point). From the moment they wake to the moment when the Trio goes to get water, the twins are always in Harry's sight and don't move an inch in either chronological direction. (As well, Mrs Weasley gets all the candies from their pockets before they leave the house.) I suppose they could have travelled somewhere while the Trio was getting water, but if they show signs of having done it, Harry doesn't mention them. The only comment we get after the water- gatherers' return is George saying, "You've been ages," which I suppose could be irony, but he's not acting shifty or funny or anything. Anywhere else you'd like me to look? --azriona From azriona at juno.com Fri Dec 3 08:14:32 2004 From: azriona at juno.com (Sharon) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 08:14:32 -0000 Subject: Predictions for book 6 and 7. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119134 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "finwitch" wrote: > > "dumbledore11214: >> > 4. Peter will help Harry somehow (I don't see this one at all, but I > > think this is going happen by story logic). I have always maintained - long before the title to HBP was released, and indeed shortly after OoP was released - that we would learn more about Peter Pettigrew in Book 6, including why he went to Voldemort, and perhaps even his motivations and reasons for giving up James & Lily's location. And what JKR said in the World Book Day chats pretty much cemented my theories on this. In the last year or so I've become convinced that Peter isn't going to make it out of HBP alive. Beyond that, I'm thinking that Trevor is the HBP and that Neville is far more important to the Lost Prophecy than Dumbledore seems to think. --azriona From eloiseherisson at aol.com Fri Dec 3 08:36:10 2004 From: eloiseherisson at aol.com (eloise_herisson) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 08:36:10 -0000 Subject: Knowing it was Snape (was: What has Snape seen) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119135 > SSSusan: > Right, I agree about the pensieve. But what I was talking about were > the memories Harry accessed during Occlumency lessons, not those > memories he experienced when he dipped his head into the pensieve. > It's the snippets of memories he got directly from Snape that we had > been talking about and which I was saying shouldn't require the > person himself to be a participant in. Does that make sense? ~Eloise: Perfect. :-) Sorry, I'd gone off tangentially there without completing the allusion. It just seems to me that JKR treats memories a bit oddly. If she does it for the Pensieve, then I think it's quite possible that she does so for the memories accessed in Occlumency. Although it's an attractive idea to compare those memories of Snape's which Harry accesses with those of his which Snape accesses, unfortunately I don't think we are in a position to compare like with like. Remember that when we hear about the memories that Snape accesses, we are hearing it from Harry's perspective, they are memories welling up in his mind and we are seeing them from his POV: they are narrated in the first person, as it were. We don't know *how* Snape sees them, just that he does. Maybe he sees Harry in the action. He's certainly not inside the memory enough to know, for instance, who Ripper belonged to, which was surely an integral part of the memory. Again, when we see Snape's memories, we are seeing them from Harry's perspective and they *seem* to be told in the third person. We don't know if that is Snape's experience of them; perhaps he is "experiencing" sitting in his bedroom shooting flies, rather than watching a figure doing it. We are told that Legilimency is an imprecise art, that it is *not* mind reading. Perhaps this third person viewpoint is one of its limitations. It could also be simply a literary device consequential to the fact that the book being about Harry, we are familiar with Harry's memories, but not with Snape's. JKR is dropping in the first really concrete hints about Snape's early background and it would have been awkward and taken a great more description than she probably wanted to put in to describe the events from Snape's childhood in such a way that we recognised them for what they were without letting us see him in the action. If Harry had experienced the adults fighting without seeing the small dark haired boy crying in the corner, it could easily have been mistaken for one of his own memories. Letting us see Snape in the memories allows the information to be conveyed far more economically and therefore, I think, more effectively. Likewise, Harry's memories are told more economically from the first person viewpoint; the narrative would be more cumbersome if he had to be described seeing himself in the action. ~Eloise From finwitch at yahoo.com Fri Dec 3 10:07:18 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 10:07:18 -0000 Subject: Harry/Riddle In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119136 > Inge once again: > Im not asking for anyone to buy this *theory* - I just thought that > maybe somebody had other *clues* that might point in the direction > that Harry and Tom are one and the same. > > You are quite right that Tom doesn't wear glasses and doesn't have a > scar. For them to be one and the same he doesn't have to. > We don't know why Harry wears glasses. Could be caused by something > that happened when Tom tried to AK him. The scar is obvious - we know > where that comes from. > > Im not meaning to say that Harry and Tom live the same life over - Im > thinking more in lines of TimeTurning - but then again not quite. > Something similar. Finwitch: Well... it's not so that Harry would become Tom Riddle/Voldemort - no. It could be that Harry Potter was reborn Tom Riddle, correcting the mistakes of the past - making different choices, that is. And to support this is Hagrid's comment: Dunno if he had enough human in him left to die. Maybe that *human* part was indeed gone and reborn - as Harry. Not that I think so - no. Tom Riddle and Harry Potter are TOO different personality-wise to have that kind of connection... but what do we know about afterlife? Finwitch From spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com Fri Dec 3 10:24:06 2004 From: spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com (dungrollin) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 10:24:06 -0000 Subject: OOP: The unknown power In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119137 Dungrollin wrote: > The thing is, JKR hasn't ever talked about sacrificial love, > has she? She's said that the trait she values above all others > is courage. Which leaves those of us who find the idea a little > slushy with some hope that what lies behind the door may be > something more original, (and less overtly religious). Geoff replied: Well then, how do you equate that with the following.... '"But why couldn't Quirrell touch me?" "Your mother died to save you. If there is one thing Voldemort cannot understand, it is love. He didn't realise that love so 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 some protection for ever. It is in your very skin."' (PS "The Man with Two Faces" p.216 UK edition) If that isn't JKR talking about sacrificial love, then I'm the next DADA teacher... It is never slushy love in such a situation. As I said earlier, the problem is what do we mean by "love"? There are examples of sacrificial love throughout life. Parents who give up their lives to save their children, folk who step into a dangerous situation for the sake of others in peril (I think of my local lifeboat crew who frequently lay their lives on the line for strangers in trouble). As a side issue, I believe as a Christian that Christ's sacrificial love is the heartbeat of the universe but others may not want to be overtly religious. My answer is I'm not religious, I have a faith; there is a difference rather like the four types of love recognised in Greek. The fact is that, without real, sacrifical love, the world becomes a dictatorship where what we do is driven by fear and there is no room for showing compassion and empathy for its own sake. We might all as well join Voldemort on the "what's in it for me" merry- go-round. Dungrollin replies: That's exactly the paragraph that I was talking about in the bit you snipped. The point I was trying to make was that the phrase `sacrificial love' is never used in canon (just like `life debt' and `wandless magic'), and JKR has never (to my knowledge - please correct me if I'm wrong) used it in an interview. Indeed. What do we mean by love, and sacrificial love, at that? I would disagree that lifeboat crews are a good example. Do they all *love* the unknown people they're risking their necks for? Not slushy love, definitely, but IMO not love at all. And in order for it to qualify under `sacrificial love', it would have to be the love for these strangers that *causes* them to risk their necks. I might just about stretch to `compassion' in a few cases, but that's not the same thing. As for your last two sentences, they're not fact at all, they're your opinion, and in relation to the RW I disagree completely. (Imagine the big smiley that I'm too stuffy to use.) Sacrifices don't have to be made with love in order for them to make the world a better place. Small acts of kindness, compassion and empathy are not worthless because they are done out of a sense of obligation rather than love. (I'm talking about the effects of these acts on the RW, not on the effect upon one's soul, on which I'm not qualified to write). And since I disagree with you on what constitutes a sacrifice made because of love, (I think they're rarer than you do because of your broad definition of love), I don't think the world would be a dramatically poorer place without them (poorer, yes, but not hugely so ? Christ is a special case, I'm not talking about him). I certainly doubt that it would leave us `driven by fear' and with `no room for showing compassion and empathy for its own sake'. However, in the Potterverse it appears that sacrifices made with love are smiled upon as more meaningful, powerful and magical than those made without love. Apparently (though I live in hope that I'll be proven wrong) if Snape were to die saving Harry it would be a poorer sacrifice as he would have nothing but contempt for Harry until the end. Which is funny, because I'd have far more respect for a Snape-for-Harry sacrifice for an idealistic goal (i.e. defeating Voldy) than for a Lily-for-Harry sacrifice with the love that a mother can't help but feel for her son (and hormones, and genetics) on her side. The former would require fighting so many instincts where the latter would require going along with them. Oh, yes, please... Snape snuffs it saving Harry, and it transpires that sacrificing one's life for a person one deeply hates gives ten times the protection that Lily's sacrifice did... Dungrollin Who is going to refrain from making any last controversial comments here, no matter how tempting they may be. From quigonginger at yahoo.com Fri Dec 3 10:49:54 2004 From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 10:49:54 -0000 Subject: Filk: Magic Bus Blues Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119138 It is difficult to write a solo for Madam Marsh without overstepping the bounds of good taste. Stepping out of charactor for a moment, I will try. "Magic Bus Blues" to the tune of "Wedding Bell Blues" by the Fifth Dimension To Pippin, who I was shocked to learn was actually not a real life Hobbit ;-) Madam Marsh sings: Ill! I wish this bus would just stand still. But with a fear of heights, a broomstick's not my way. No, and if I Floo, the ashes turn my robes all grey. I once got a slight thrill when I was learning. Once I got up high, well, my guts were churning. Though I know that I don't wanna be, I think I'm gonna be ill. I wish this bus would just stand still. If I could Apparate, my life would just be swell. No, which was north and which was south, I couldn't tell. I got stuck once in Alaska and caught pneumonia. Then when I got home, I landed in a begonia. And now I know I don't wanna be, I think I'm gonna be ill. I wish this bus would just stand still. But it's a long, long jump from Kent to Stoatshead Hill. I've heard the Muggles have a motion sickness pill. I will be ill. I will be ill. I know I'm gonna be ill. I got the Magic Bus Blues. I'm gonna be ill. I got the Magic Bus Blues. Gonna be ill... Ginger, who is not an actual Jedi. From willsonkmom at msn.com Fri Dec 3 11:04:01 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 11:04:01 -0000 Subject: Knowing it was Snape (was: What has Snape seen) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119139 Eliose: Letting us see > Snape in the memories allows the information to be conveyed far more > economically and therefore, I think, more effectively. Likewise, > Harry's memories are told more economically from the first person > viewpoint; the narrative would be more cumbersome if he had to be > described seeing himself in the action. > Potioncat: But we do see Harry in the action in his memories in the first session. Except for one memory and that one has no mention of Harry. It's just Hermione, covered in fur. From bob.oliver at cox.net Fri Dec 3 11:47:00 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 11:47:00 -0000 Subject: Predictions for book 6 and 7. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119140 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > 1. Voldemort WILL be destroyed somehow. :o) Agreed > > 2. Harry WILL survive at the end (I would place this one at 50-50, > but since I really want this one to happen, I will predict it > anyway). I would give you 2-1 in favor of Harry's survival. > > 3. Remus Lupin is NOT Voldemort's servant and has never been > Voldemort's servant. No bet. The odds against Remus being a DE are astronomical > > 4. Peter will help Harry somehow (I don't see this one at all, but I > think this is going happen by story logic). 2-1 in favor of Peter helping Harry, although with the proviso that he may not actually intend to help Harry (think Gollum at the end of LOTR) > > 5. Sirius WILL return in some shape or form (I really want him to > return as human, but I realise that most likely it will be spirit or > portrait or something like that). 2-1 in favor of Sirius returning/communicating with Harry. 5-3 against this being a recurring or permanent manifestation. > > 6. Harry will think that Snape betrayed the Order in HBP. 2-1 in favor of this or some similar belief by Harry about Snape. > 7. We will learn in book 7 that Snape did not betray the Order. Even money. I don't think Snape will consciously betray the Order. However, his dislike of Harry (and others) may lead him to do something that is an inadvertant betrayal. Also, all these instances in all the other books of Harry suspecting Snape and being proved wrong are starting to smell suspiciously like a double-blind. It may be time for Harry to be suspicious about Snape and be right for once. > 8. Harry will forgive Snape. Even money while Snape is alive. 2-1 in favor if Snape dies. > 9. HBP is Remus or Godric Gryffindor. I would like this, but I'll have to say the odds are 1-1. From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Fri Dec 3 13:07:30 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 13:07:30 -0000 Subject: Harry's Protection (was Re: Questions) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119141 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "M.Clifford" wrote: > > > > Kneasy: > > Yep. That power. Something else again, I think - and separate from > > the various protections. Everyone wants to know what it is and how > > it can crunch Voldy. > > > > Valky: > Now I think I see here that you are considering the *touch* of > Harry's skin to be the power that Voldemort does not know. > DD says in GOF something like 'hmm yes he has overcome *that > particular* obstacle. Meaning he can now touch Harry. > Then in OOtP Voldemort encounters the unbearable *touch* of Love > *inside* Harry, so I see what you mean. > Outside, Inside, then where? > > > > Kneasy: Um. No, not really - though Voldy having circumvented the Ancient Magic protection may open the way for that power (whatever it is) to be used against him. See, I know that lots of fans think or hope that 'love' is the answer. I'm one of those that hopes otherwise - it's too Disneyfied for my taste. But not only that, whatever the power is, DD must have recognised it way back at GH. He stuffs Harry into Privet Drive because he sees him as something special, the one foretold in the Prophecy the one that *has* the power - meaning he'd got it already. If Harry is filled with love why allow the Dursleys to treat him as they did? What's DD up to? Testing it to destruction? In fact, so far as I can see there is only one character that could be considered as demonstrating a kind of love and compassion towards all and sundry - and that's DD himself. So why does he need Harry to do a job he could have sorted out himself years ago? JKR has gone on record saying she admires courage and that one of the main themes of the tale is death. Taking these into account I offered the suggestion last year that the power would be some variant on Life, Life Force overcoming all obstacles - or something similar. It fits with what DD says about the locked room. Consider the Dept. of Mysteries and the rooms the kids go through. Compare these with what DD has to say about what isn't in the Locked Room: "More wonderful and more terrible than Death (the Death Chamber), than human intelligence (the brain tank), than the forces of nature (the planetary system)." Throw in the paradoxes of Time as another make-weight mystery. To my mind what fits very well into this little list of subjects suitable for the study of the mysterious isn't love but the mystery of life itself. And when you recall that Voldy is about death (Death Eaters) and by attempting immortality is trying to circumvent natural life as we know it - well, I think I'm in with a fighting chance of being right. Just how she's going to relate this to Harry is something I haven't quite figured out yet. From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Fri Dec 3 13:32:58 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 13:32:58 -0000 Subject: Harry's Protection (was Re: Questions) In-Reply-To: <005d01c4d8d5$49960a60$6701a8c0@MITRE.ORG> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119142 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "charme" wrote: > > Ou! Pick me, my hand is up!!! :) Valky has it to my way of thinking as it > will be most interesting to see if Harry tries to willingly push his mind on > Voldemort. I mean, it must have come as a teensy shock to LV when he > discovered that Harry could "see" thru him. Instead of fretting about it, LV > chose to use this to his advantage at the end of OoP. He may have made some > oversights in the pasts, but he is nonetheless pretty resourceful. It does > make me curious if Harry might be able to turn that advantage back his way, > since he didn't have to try to "see" through LV. If that can be mastered, > it's possible Harry might even be potentially more powerful than LV from > that "mind" perspective in any case Just so. But the worrying thing is - he'll have to retain that bit of Voldy in his mind to form the necessary link. So we've got a risk/reward situation. Might well end up as a race to see which happens first - Harry crunching Voldy or Voldy corrupting Harry. Once again one of Kneasy's past musings may be worthy of consideration - The Temptation. If Harry continues on the downward spiral that he demonstrated in OoP - stroppy, uncooperative, angry - and becomes worse, then we have a scenario where Voldy could turn Harry into another Tom in the making. And makes him an offer that a Harry with that mind-set might not refuse. That'd be fun. Of course he'd eventually come to his senses and do the right thing; but just think of the damage he could cause in the meantime! Fair warms the cockles of an old FEATHERBOA's heart. Kneasy From jferer at yahoo.com Fri Dec 3 14:03:44 2004 From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 14:03:44 -0000 Subject: Book Two Discoveries! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119143 Antosha:"I'm leery of the 'Heir of Gryffindor vs. Heir of Slytherin" setup mostly because it seems very... I don't know... unsubtle and schematic. White Hat vs. Black Hat. The world JKR is building up seems to beg more moral complexity than that." I hear you on this. JKR has danced around the idea already, though, "...it takes a true Gryffindor...", says Dumbledore, so in a way Harry is already emblematic of the spirit of Gryffindor, whether or not he's the Heir. Antosha:"I do want to point out, however, that while the WW may be (literally) littered with DESCENDANTS of the Founders, each would have at most a single HEIR. In the same way, Queen Victoria has many living descendants, peers and royals all. But only one of them currently sits on the throne of England. Elizabeth II is Victoria's sole heir." Point well taken, but VR's official heirs were determined by a complex set of rules - in other words, somewhat artificial. The concept of an heir in the Wizard World might be harder to figure out. Antosha:"In CoS, it is made clear that Tom Riddle is not only Salazar Slytherin's HEIR, he is SS's only remaining DESCENDANT, which is pretty wild. Not terribly good breeding stock, that family. Though, given their disposition, this is perhaps not terribly surprising." Question: "What does the Slytherin family use for birth control?" Answer:"Their personalities." Jim Ferer From meriaugust at yahoo.com Fri Dec 3 14:38:01 2004 From: meriaugust at yahoo.com (meriaugust) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 14:38:01 -0000 Subject: Predictions for book 6 and 7. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119144 > "dumbledore11214: > > 1. Voldemort WILL be destroyed somehow. :o) > > > > 2. Harry WILL survive at the end (I would place this one at 50- 50, > > but since I really want this one to happen, I will predict it > > anyway). > > > > 3. Remus Lupin is NOT Voldemort's servant and has never been > > Voldemort's servant. > > > > 4. Peter will help Harry somehow (I don't see this one at all, but I > > think this is going happen by story logic). > > > > 5. Sirius WILL return in some shape or form (I really want him to > > return as human, but I realise that most likely it will be spirit or > > portrait or something like that). > > > > 6. Harry will think that Snape betrayed the Order in HBP. > > > > 7. We will learn in book 7 that Snape did not betray the Order. > > > > 8. Harry will forgive Snape. > > > > 9. HBP is Remus or Godric Gryffindor. > > Finwitch adds: > > 10. Aberforth Dumbledore will become more important (at least I hope > so, he seems interesting as it is). > > 11. A car accident or Accidental Magic? will happen in the first > chapter of HP&tHBP that causes Harry to leave the Dursleys. > > 12. Harry is terribly upset in the beginning of HP&tHBP, learns to > deal with his emotions during the main plot and then uses this ability > near the end of the book to defeat something Voldemort is up to. This > is partly as he learns Occlumency and Legilemency. > > 13. Harry uses Legilimency to find out what Aunt Petunia is hiding in > Book 7, since she won't answer his questions. > > 14. Harry will face down Uncle Vernon on his 17th birthday, since he's > then of age and therefore allowed to do magic and leaves the Dursleys > for good. > > 15. Harry will learn to Apparate. > > 16. Weasleys' Wizard Wheezes at 93 Diagon Alley gives great assistance > to Harry in his fight against Voldemort. Now Meri: 17: Neville is toast. He's gonna sacrifice himself to the cause and go down like a massive hero, but not before getting a new wand, shocking the entire by becoming the number two student in sixth year, showing up Snape in Potions and beating Hermione in Herbology. 18: Ron and Hermione will finally get together on screen. 19: Harry will be reinstated as Quidditch Seeker and both Ginny and Ron will stay on the team, too. 20: Dumbledore is going to die. 21: Hogwarts will be attacked (probably in the book 7 climax) and we will get to see all the secrets of the school that we haven't seen yet. 22: Percy is going to die. 23: Either Remus or Peter will die at the hand of the other. 24: Book 6 will end in a cliffhanger. At which point every HP fan around the world will flip out and start sending Howlers to JKR. Meri From willsonkmom at msn.com Fri Dec 3 14:44:08 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 14:44:08 -0000 Subject: Slytherin House again. Was: Re: Problem with OotP? (was: Pampering) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119145 snip > Alla: > > I am also not sure about teachers prejudice against Slytherins in > general. Before Harry came to school, they did win the Cup for seven > times after all. Does not sound to me as if Dumbledore does not > allow them to be recognised. Potioncat: Agreed. The fact that Slytherin won the cup for 7 years in a row, tells me that there is more to them than we see now. The cup is based on points, awarded by teachers and by doing well in Quidditch. Certainly Slytherins didn't trick teachers into giving them points, and certainly if McGonagall thought Slytherins were cheating at Quidditch she would have done something about it. We haven't seen any "nice" Slytherins, but I find it hard to believe there aren't any. Yes, if that's the way JKR chooses to write them, then that's the way it is. Harry's relationship with Slytherins is strained for two reasons, Draco and Snape. But his relationship with members of other houses isn't all roses either. He's had disagreements and misunderstandings with those students too. I think JKR is tricking us into believing the sterotypes about Slytherin, and will pull the rug from under us later on. We've seen Ron face some of his stereotypes head on with giants and werewolves. And we've seen a champion come out of Hufflepuff. I still maintain that ambition and cunning are not vices. Although ambition could drive a person in the wrong direction. JKR may consider herself a Gryffindor, but she would not be where she is today without ambition. And if she didn't have some cunning, Warner Brothers would have walked all over her. Potioncat From foxmoth at qnet.com Fri Dec 3 14:46:09 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 14:46:09 -0000 Subject: Slytherin House again. Was: Re: Problem with OotP? (was: Pampering) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119146 > Alla: > > Hmm, good point, but I think that the students which we know kinda meant to be the representatives of the Houses. Are we supposed to IMAGINE for example that there is a good Slytherin, if Jo does not show us one?< Pippin: As you know, I am always suspicious when Jo leaves things to our imaginations. Bad Gryffindors were left to our imagination until Book Five, when we saw that James and Sirius were bullies, that Percy turned against his family, and Jo confirmed that Peter was indeed in Gryffindor House. Alla: > And all Slytherin grown-ups whom we saw int he books, did become DE, unless Iforgot somebody.< Pippin: It's not beyond a shadow of a doubt that Sirius's parents were Slytherins, but given the serpent-theme decor, Phineas Nigellus, and Malfoy's proud declaration that all his family were Slytherin, I think it's a good bet. And they weren't Death Eaters. > Alla: > > Well, OK, you are basically saying that those children with potential to "go bad" so to speak are grouped in Slytherin to give him help and to stop them from doing bad.< Pippin: Not at all. Assuming Hogwarts worked then as it does now, the founders were willing to teach Slytherin students, and to have their students taught by Slytherin himself. I am saying that the other three founders did not find Slytherin's professed ethics or his criteria for selecting students abhorrent, nor by and large does the wizarding world today. Historically, the theories which became the foundation of today's racist ideologies were not invented to justify racial discrimination. They were invented by people with no concept of social or genetic change as part of the legitimate attempt to explain how people in different parts of the world could be so physically and culturally different. The wizards, at least those who are isolated from the Muggle world, are in the same situation. To them, theories of racial inferiority or degeneration may well seem something about which people of good will can disagree, just as people in my country nowadays can disagree about the death penalty. Both sides think their position is the moral one, but there are many who wouldn't characterize the other side as "bad", just mistaken. We haven't heard any adult except Hagrid denounce Slytherin House as bad. IMO, if Dumbledore tried to do it, he would either lose his position or the Slytherin parents would pull their children out of school. All Dumbledore can legitimately do in a free society is encourage independent thought and hope the Slytherins will see for themselves that ultimately a mixed and equal society is not only functional but stronger. Since they respect independence and strength, the outlook is not unhopeful, IMO. Pippin From eloiseherisson at aol.com Fri Dec 3 15:12:58 2004 From: eloiseherisson at aol.com (eloise_herisson) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 15:12:58 -0000 Subject: Knowing it was Snape (was: What has Snape seen) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119147 > Eliose: > Letting us see > > Snape in the memories allows the information to be conveyed far > more > > economically and therefore, I think, more effectively. Likewise, > > Harry's memories are told more economically from the first person > > viewpoint; the narrative would be more cumbersome if he had to be > > described seeing himself in the action. > > > > Potioncat: > But we do see Harry in the action in his memories in the first > session. Except for one memory and that one has no mention of > Harry. It's just Hermione, covered in fur. Eloise: Hee. And I thought this was precisely what others were arguing that we don't see, hence my laborious explanations (Vivamus did it far more succinctly). Ah well. But I think there's a difference. With the Snape memories, we see the action completely from the outside. We see a boy sitting alone in his room, shooting flies. We see a boy crying in a corner while a man shouts at a woman. We are given a description of him. There are no descriptions of Harry's appearance in the memories. With Harry's memories, "He was five, watching Dudley riding a new red bicycle, and his heart was bursting with jealousy...he was nine, and Ripper the bulldog was chasing him up a tree and the Dursleys were laughing below on the lawn...he was sitting under the sorting Hat and it was telling him he would do well in Slytherin...Hermione was lying in the hospital wing, her face covered with thick black hair...a hundred Dementors were closing in on him beside the dark lake...Cho Chang was drawing nearer to him under the mistletoe..." All these memories are, IMO, told from Harry's viewpoint. It's not of a case of "He saw himself as a boy of five, watching Dudley riding a new red bicycle and recalled how jealous he had felt...he saw himself at nine, being chased up a tree by Ripper...he saw himself sitting under the Sorting Hat and remembered the words it had spoken to him... he saw himself watching Hermione as she lay in the hospital wing... he saw himself beside the lake as a hundred Dementors closed in on him...He saw himself as Cho Chang drew nearer to him as he stood under the mistletoe..." I'm quite sure that in all these cases, he's remembering the event as he experienced it, not seeing himself in the action, hence the fact that he's feeling the jealousy and hearing the Sorting Hat whisper those private words in his ear, something that no external observer heard. I know it could be argued the other way, but I think this is the obvious interpretation; it's generally how we remember things. Isn't it? Or am I just odd? If you're correct and some of those memories are told in the first person and some in the third, then it supports to my argument that JKR is not consistent in the way she depicts memories and therefore we cannot make an argument from the fact that we *see* a young person in Snape's memories (that most interpret to be him) that ergo it is *not* Snape after all. ~Eloise From easimm at yahoo.com Fri Dec 3 02:47:12 2004 From: easimm at yahoo.com (curlyhornedsnorkack) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 02:47:12 -0000 Subject: Snape's hero complex Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119148 Would a hero complex explain Snape's actions thoughout the series? I think he wants to be recognized as a great hero. I've looked around and I don't think this issue has been covered. If Snape is suffering from a hero complex, it could explain a lot of things about him: his pride, his thirst for recognition and respect, his actions towards Harry and the Marauders, why he joined and left the death eaters, his willingness to risk his life to fight Voldemort, possibly why Dumbledore trusts him, and why he wasn't allowed to be DADA teacher. (I write "hero complex", a boring old cliche for Harry's "problem", on purpose.) There are so many issues involved that I'm going to tackle only a few: whether he has a hero complex, whether it could explain why Snape behaves so badly towards Harry, and why Dumbledore might trust him. The following are some proofs of his works as a hero. When Snape was a student, he worked to expose a werewolf, and to expell some school bullies at his own risk. In SS/PS, Snape is the only teacher who works in the background to save Harry and the stone. In POA, Dumbledore relies on Snape to be in charge of searching for Sirius in the building. In the shrieking shack, Snape thinks he is saving Harry's life from Sirius. And of course, Snape has risked his life to spy on the Death Eaters. (The recent message 119077 mentions examples of how Snape has been a force for good.) I've always had a problem imagining Snape as a realistic character because I can't envisage how a grown man could have so much hatred for a child, because of something that happened in the past, especially a child orphaned before he even knew his father. I think the problem is that something current is bothering Snape, and that is that Harry is a rival Hero who is more successful. They have a similar background. Both Harry and Snape at a young age are out to prove themselves (so says the hat about Harry, although Snape probably made more effort in his exams than Harry probably makes.) If the scenes Harry saw from Snape's memories are about Snape, both of them are or were poor with bad clothes and stress-filled family lives. Both try to fix things that are wrong. Both are good at dueling. But Harry has all the glory, almost from birth, for something for which he isn't really responsible. It't just not fair, and Snape hates it when people don't play by the rules. The degree to which Snape seems to fixate on Harry's celebrity indicates to me that Harry's fame is what bothers him most. The first thing Snape says to him is "Ah yes, Harry Potter. Our new - celebrity". PS/SS.) Two of Snape's first three lines are about Harry's celebrity. No other teacher finds celebrity a fault, and only the two oddballs, Lockhart, and Trelawney give his celebrity any importance. In POA Snape berates Harry for escaping to Hogwarts while everone is trying to "keep famous Harry Potter safe". In OOTP Snape actually wants to know whether Harry feels special or important. Then Snape emphasises it again by telling Harry that he is neither special nor important. In OOTP, Snape emphasises his rivalry, (in my opinion, at least) when he puts Harry down by telling him that he's a "lamentable potion-maker". There are more examples than I have time to list. Being special is really important to Snape. There are numerous examples of Snape demanding to be treated with respect. Also, the two people who seem to handle him best, MG and DD, never call him just "Snape", and insist to Harry that he always talk of him as "Professor Snape". In POA, when Snape is apoplectic with rage at Harry when he find out that Sirius has escapes. A reason given by Lupin is that Snape is not going to be given an award for bravery. Perhaps DD recognized the hero complex early on in Snape, and mentored him (see the excellent message 118948), to mold Snape into someone useful at some point in time against Voldemort. He would be particularly useful because he was a Slytherin. (I wonder if we'll learn something in the future about a prophesy for Snape, one deeply unsatisfying to him, in which he learns he'll be the man who helped the man who gets rid of Voldemort. In other words, he's always playing second fiddle. I also wonder if Snape and everyone else in the OOTP had heard of Harry's prophesy a long while before.(I've seen this discussed about Harry's parents.) Snape could hate Neville Longbottom as well for being a possible Hero. I wish I could flesh this out but I just don't have time. Go ahead if you please. From tzakis1225 at netzero.com Fri Dec 3 15:56:38 2004 From: tzakis1225 at netzero.com (demetra1225) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 15:56:38 -0000 Subject: Slytherin House again. Was: Re: Problem with OotP? (was: Pampering) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119149 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ginnysthe1" wrote: Kim now: [snip of Sevvie discussion] Also it makes sense, your point that there statistically would have to be some non-purebloods in Slytherin. Demetra: Somewhere, I have seen a picture of JKR holding up a page from her notes where she lists the students with a symbol next to the student's name that indicates pure-blood, half-blood or Muggle-born. I am sure that there was a current Slytherin student (Millicent Bulstrode?) who is listed as a half-blood. I think there are some half-bloods in Slytherin, but probably no Muggle-borns. There may also be some part humans. A Slytherin girl (Millicent again?) is described as looking like a part-hag . I think Harry once describes Marcus Flint as looking like he had troll blood. Kim again: I agree that it's a rather negative way to view mere 11 year olds, seeing them as already so far-gone by that age that they automatically qualify for the worst of the 4 houses (of course someone is welcome to chime in as to why Slytherin may not be such a bad house after all...). [snip] Demetra: It seems that Slytherin traits are often construed as being "bad". I think that the Slytherin traits of ambition and/or cunning are not bad in and of themselves. I could argue that the traits of all of the houses are neither good nor bad, it all depends on the moral core of each person and how they choose to use the traits. Hufflepuffs are loyal, which I personally think is a wonderful trait. Except Bellatrix is described as LV's loyal and devoted servant. Loyalty to a maniacal murderer is not exactly a trait to be admired. Gryffindor courage and bravery are also positive traits. But again, I have heard people describe suicide bombers as being brave and courageous. I suppose it does take a bit of courage to die for your cause, but if your cause is evil than how can I admire your courage? As far as Slytherin traits ? ask any Mom who has ever had to get her sick and feverish toddler to actually swallow their medicine if it is a good thing to be a bit cunning. Kim again: My point on second consideration ought to have been that Slytherin House exists not to make its children *permanently* serve as an example to "good" children, but to place them where it seems appropriate based on who they already appear to be (even at age 11) and then hopefully over time, they'll broaden their view of the world from self-focused to something more tolerant and inclusive. Maybe that's the problem with separate houses in the first place, that they may pigeonhole the students unfairly. No one can be really sure what good or evil any of the students are capable of until the time comes for them to be tested. So I repeat, We shall see, we shall see... ;-) Demetra: I agree with your last two sentences. I think that if Slytherin house is the "worst" of all the houses, it is the fault of the system of taking all of these children who have been reared on this pure-blood elitist philosophy and placing them only with other similarly raised children. I do not believe that any ideology or belief system that has been ingrained in an 11 year old by their parents is fixed in stone. But to change a point of view, you must be exposed to other ways of thinking. I don't see this happening with the Slytherins (again, unless it is being done behind the scenes). What we do see is that these children are isolated with other like-thinking children. Then they are placed in direct competition with other kids/houses for the House Cup. The kids who aren't pure-blood elitists dislike and don't hang around with the Slytherins. So, how would one ever expect, under these circumstances, that the Slytherin kids would broaden their horizons and see that there are other, perhaps better, belief systems? Demetra From foxmoth at qnet.com Fri Dec 3 15:59:48 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 15:59:48 -0000 Subject: Detached?Lupin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119150 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jen Reese" wrote: > > > Pippin: > > Once JKR has established a character's pattern of speech, does she have to keep repeating herself? Or can she do what English-speaking writers are encouraged to do, and keep the adverb tags to a minimum when constructing dialogue? > > > > What tone of voice do you impute to "I need scarcely say that I failed dismally." ? (OOP ch 9) > > Jen: We have proof beyond a shadow of a doubt that JKR loves > adverbs, and generally uses them with great abandon. I see no reason why she would scrimp on Lupin.< Pippin: But she *does* scrimp on Lupin. We're very often left to guess, or at least that is my impression. LOONS? > > Pippin: > > Lupin comforts other characters when it won't cost him anything to do so... but he detaches from people and creatures all too easily. Look at the way he disposes of the dark creatures he cared for in PoA, compared to the way everyone else feels about losing their pets in that book. > > Jen: Disposed of dark creatures? I know you will have canon for this Pippin. < Pippin: "Forward Neville, and finish him off!" PoA ch 7. What happened to the others, we don't know, but the one we do know about was destroyed. Jen: In my mind when I read POA, I immediately assumed the dark creatures were released into the Forbidden Forest or given to Hagrid to find good homes ;). Now, I have no canon for that, just pointing out where my imagination took me based on my perception of the character. Pippin: Unfortunately my imagination, based on my perception of the character, leads me to quite a different place. I have the same problem with him comforting the werewolf in OOP. I want to know if Lupin had an alibi for the night the poor fellow was bitten, and while my imagination happily conjures Moony and Padfoot in a dozy heap by the fireside, the canon insists on showing me Sirius, two weeks past full moon, unkempt, boozy, up late with his guttering candle after a solitary supper and every inch the jilted spouse. > Jen: JKR seems to view evil as a choice problem more than anything. A concious choice to pursue a worldview, a community and a doctrine that gives rise to oppression, prejudice, and corrupt or extremist activities. So far Lupin has not been indicted as one of these people.< We have no evidence Lupin has engaged in pure-blood ideaology, Muggle torture, employment within a corrupt government, or affiliation with people engaging in nefarious activities< Pippin: We don't? Trying to kill Peter was extremist activity, at least Harry thought so. Failing to inform on Sirius was abetting someone whom he believed had engaged in pure blood ideology, Muggle torture and affiliation with people engaging in nefarious activities. Lupin's job was more important to him than Harry's skin, and if that wasn't choosing power over love, what is? Lupin didn't have paranoid, sadistic reasons for those choices, but my point is, he didn't have to. Selfishness and detachment were enough. Pippin From wulfkub at wulfkub.com Fri Dec 3 16:03:48 2004 From: wulfkub at wulfkub.com (Amanda) Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 11:03:48 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Predictions for book 6 and 7. References: Message-ID: <008201c4d951$aefcd4c0$0402a8c0@carolina.rr.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119151 From: dumbledore11214 > I looked through files. I saw predictions for OOP. I did not see any > for the upcoming books. I know we played this game, but I did not > participated at that time, so I want to make my predictions for HBP > and some for book 7 too. Anybody care to join, place any bets? > First one I am VERY confident of - > >>> 1. Voldemort WILL be destroyed somehow. :o) Kethryn agrees. >>> 2. Harry WILL survive at the end (I would place this one at 50-50, >>> but since I really want this one to happen, I will predict it >>> anyway). Kethryn agrees cause she thinks it becomes too much like LoTR at that point. >>> 3. Remus Lupin is NOT Voldemort's servant and has never been Voldemort's servant. Kethryn totally agrees >>> 4. Peter will help Harry somehow (I don't see this one at all, but I >>> think this is going happen by story logic). Kethryn remains neutral >>> 5. Sirius WILL return in some shape or form (I really want him to >>> return as human, but I realise that most likely it will be spirit or >>> portrait or something like that). Kethryn sure hopes he returns and is in human form but acknowledges that this is a slim to none possibility. >>> 6. Harry will think that Snape betrayed the Order in HBP. Kethryn agrees. >>> 7. We will learn in book 7 that Snape did not betray the Order. Kethryn agrees >>> 8. Harry will forgive Snape. Kethryn agrees. >>> 9. HBP is Remus or Godric Gryffindor. Kethryn thinks that it could be Snape but can't remember if JKR said definatly that it was not Snape (but acknowledges that JKR possibly did say that...I just cant find it). Kethryn's hand at predictions - 1. McGonnagall is a gonner. Probably at the end of book 6. It sucks, I know, but she is not only expendable but, tactically from Voldemort's PoV, she is an excellent choice to knock off, striking a blow at both Harry and Dumbledore. 2. Neville is going to kill Bellatrix (at least, I hope that Neville gets to kill that ... thing). 3. Lockhart is going to show back up. 4. If any of the trio die (NO!), I am betting that it will be Hermione. Why Hermione? Most emotional wallop for the buck, other than killing Harry off (professional suicide or stroke of genius...that one is a crap shoot). And JKR could finish the story with just two male characters easily enough. 5. If Hermione doesn't die, I think that Ginny will die. Remember the boggart scene in OotP? Ginny and Hermione were the only ones not shown. 6. Take you pick as to which other Weasley's will die; they are all viable candidates. 7. Death will come to Hogwarts (as in killing students and students' parents). 8. All of Harry's yearmates will be seeing Thestrals before the end of book 6. 9. Hogsmead gets attacked (either book 6 or 7). Trips to Hogsmead are cancelled and the oned eyed witch passageway is discovered and sealed. 10. Harry, Ginny and Ron get back on the Quidditch team 11. Draco is forced to come to some hard choices and, under a lot of strain, he forgets to be nasty to the trio. Lucius and he are going to have to have a show down if Draco is ever going to develope into something other than a nasty little git. I am betting, too, that we will be seeing more of Narcissa (or at least get some of the story there) in 6. 12. This isn't a prediction but a 'wonder' - I wonder if Voldemort will actually put in an appearance in HBP. Why? Well, if JKR is going in patterns with the stories, then Voldemort shouldn't be in book 6 (the only other book he was not in was book 3 - well, he was but not really). What do you all think? And that is more than enough for now. Kethryn From willsonkmom at msn.com Fri Dec 3 16:07:55 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 16:07:55 -0000 Subject: Knowing it was Snape (was: What has Snape seen) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119152 > Eloise: >snip > But I think there's a difference. With the Snape memories, we see the > action completely from the outside. We see a boy sitting alone in his > room, shooting flies. We see a boy crying in a corner while a man > shouts at a woman. We are given a description of him. There are no > descriptions of Harry's appearance in the memories. > > With Harry's memories, > > "He was five, watching Dudley riding a new red bicycle, and his heart > was bursting with jealousy...he was nine, and Ripper the bulldog was > chasing him up a tree and the Dursleys were laughing below on the > lawn...he was sitting under the sorting Hat and it was telling him he > would do well in Slytherin...Hermione was lying in the hospital wing, > her face covered with thick black hair...a hundred Dementors were > closing in on him beside the dark lake...Cho Chang was drawing nearer > to him under the mistletoe..." > > All these memories are, IMO, told from Harry's viewpoint. Potioncat: I think it could be argued that JKR chose a way to "show" memories in both the pensieve and in Occlumency. I'm sure she tried different approaches and chose what would work best. To my mind, these are shown the way a movie or TV program would show a memory. The way I read these is that he "sees" himself. No it isn't the way I remember things in RL, but for a written description it works. He sees himself at 9 running from Ripper (like a homemovie) But I don't think she's being inconsistent...(having only looked at the one session) In Snape's memory, Harry sees people, no, he doesn't feel the emotions, but again, it's the difference I think between having been the character and watching the character. >>Eliose: > If you're correct and some of those memories are told in the first > person and some in the third, then it supports to my argument that > JKR is not consistent in the way she depicts memories and therefore > we cannot make an argument from the fact that we *see* a young person > in Snape's memories (that most interpret to be him) that ergo it is > *not* Snape after all. Potioncat: No, I see it differently. Some are told in one way and some in another for a purpose. In the one session, the one event which is told differently is Hermione in the hospital scene. Occlumency!Harry didn't register himself in that scene the way he does in all the others. I think it was told differently on purpose, and done in a way that wasn't obvious. It reminds me of certain riddles which depend on a word being different. ("I don't know how to spell obivious. Can you spell it?" "Sure. I...T") If Kneasy is right, and if Sevrerus hexed James' broom, we have an early example of the feud between them. And we see Severus as the bad guy...which should please most readers. I'm not sure which it is. The most obvious is that the teenager, and the boy on the broom are Snape. Also the most likely is that the young boy is Snape. But I think it's up for interpretation until we hear more from JKR. Potioncat From caseylane at wideopenwest.com Fri Dec 3 16:19:12 2004 From: caseylane at wideopenwest.com (Casey) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 16:19:12 -0000 Subject: Detached?Lupin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119154 > Trying to kill Peter was extremist activity, at least Harry thought > so. > > Failing to inform on Sirius was abetting someone whom he > believed had engaged in pure blood ideology, Muggle torture > and affiliation with people engaging in nefarious activities. > > Lupin's job was more important to him than Harry's skin, and if > that wasn't choosing power over love, what is? > > Lupin didn't have paranoid, sadistic reasons for those choices, > but my point is, he didn't have to. Selfishness and detachment > were enough. > > Pippin I love Lupin and don't see him as ESE. Still, I was very disturbed by the fact that everyone was looking for this known murderer yet Lupin kept important information about a possible way to capture him quiet. Lupin knew, like the rest, that Black would probably try to find Harry and still he never gave Dumbledore, or anyone, the information that Black was an animagis (sp?). Why? What could be served by keeping that bit of information a secret. Why put Harry at more risk than he had to? What better way to prove to the others that he, a werewolf, was to be trusted? Instead he kept his knowledge to himself putting, not only Harry, but every other student at risk. Casey, stopping before she confinces herself that ESE!Lupin theory is correct. From boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com Fri Dec 3 16:18:59 2004 From: boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com (Smythe, Boyd T {FLNA}) Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 10:18:59 -0600 Subject: Snape and Lupin's Character Arcs (was: Lupin's Char Arc) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119155 Alla wrote: >I am sure you know my position by now - I don't believe he is ESE as in Voldemort's cervant,but I also don't believe that he is a good guy. Good guys don't do to human beings half of his size what he does to Harry and Neville, IMO.< < now boyd: Howdy, Alla! Agreed that Snape isn't a nice guy, but I think we also both agree that he seems to be on the same side as Harry in this war. Yet why not damn DD, too? After all, his actions have been far worse for Harry than Snape's mere words! (stuck him at the Dursleys, tells him almost nothing, doesn't protect him much of the time, doesn't act like a father despite being Harry's only father figure) Alla wrote: >There should be reparation of their relationship BEFORE any mentor-student relationship could be established. And I will argue that A LOT of time will pass before it happen, if it ever happens at all. I will argue closer to the end of bookk 7, actually. So, No, I don't think that Snape will be in any position to give mentoring to Harry and hopefully Dumbledore will not try to force anything between them, allowing time, or I will officially label Dumbledore as an idiot in my book. :o) < < now boyd: Here is where we diverge. While we the readers may have strong emotional outrage against how Snape treats Harry, the cold reality for Harry and Snape (especially if DD dies) is that they will need each other to overthrow LV. Snape has some know-how (I think), and Harry has whatever power "the Dark Lord knows not." They need not be friends to work together; they only need to trust each other. I see no sobbing breakdowns and apologies on Snape's part, and I would think little of Jo if she did that. Also, Harry has been fairly self-sufficient so far--why would he become so needy as to require an apology from detestable (but trustworthy) Snape? Alla wrote: >Sorry, I don't mind Snape participating in harry's training eventually, but I hope that he is not going to be his only mentor. Because I am one of those sentimental types, who believe that Harry's mentor should eventually give him some emotional support, besides preparing him for the battle with Voldy and I think that Snape is in no position ot give Harry that, neither will Harry accept that type of support from Snape. Lupin is in MUCH better position to do that as someone whom Harry trusts and loves already.< now boyd: By mentor I mean senior partner. Not confidante. Not buddy. Not father. Trainer? Yes. Imparter of knowledge? Yes. Protector? That, too. If you want someone to give warm fuzzies to Harry, I'd look for Ginny/Luna/Hermione/Ron/Tonks. Any of them would be better emotional supporters, although he hasn't sought much of that yet.... And given that list of possible emotional supporters, who needs Lupin anymore? Just seeing him become less distant isn't enough of a payoff to keep him around, IMO. Something must come of Tonks the metamorph--else why waste the words on her--and Luna seems to have jumped off the pages yet remains a mystery, and there's Ginny's continuing development. Basically, that crew all clearly has developing left to do, whereas I fear Remus to be a character completed. --boyd I'm not kidding, folks, read the FAQ! it has *fantastic* posts, theories, explanations, etc. look in Files + Links From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Fri Dec 3 17:00:00 2004 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 17:00:00 -0000 Subject: Predictions for book 6 and 7. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119156 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "meriaugust" wrote: > > > "dumbledore11214: > > > 1. Voldemort WILL be destroyed somehow. :o) > > > > > > 2. Harry WILL survive at the end (I would place this one at 50- > 50, > > > but since I really want this one to happen, I will predict it > > > anyway). > > > > > > 3. Remus Lupin is NOT Voldemort's servant and has never been > > > Voldemort's servant. > > > > > > 4. Peter will help Harry somehow (I don't see this one at all, > but I > > > think this is going happen by story logic). > > > > > > 5. Sirius WILL return in some shape or form (I really want him > to > > > return as human, but I realise that most likely it will be > spirit or > > > portrait or something like that). > > > > > > 6. Harry will think that Snape betrayed the Order in HBP. > > > > > > 7. We will learn in book 7 that Snape did not betray the Order. > > > > > > 8. Harry will forgive Snape. > > > > > > 9. HBP is Remus or Godric Gryffindor. > > > > Finwitch adds: > > > > 10. Aberforth Dumbledore will become more important (at least I > hope > > so, he seems interesting as it is). > > > > 11. A car accident or Accidental Magic? will happen in the first > > chapter of HP&tHBP that causes Harry to leave the Dursleys. > > > > 12. Harry is terribly upset in the beginning of HP&tHBP, learns to > > deal with his emotions during the main plot and then uses this > ability > > near the end of the book to defeat something Voldemort is up to. > This > > is partly as he learns Occlumency and Legilemency. > > > > 13. Harry uses Legilimency to find out what Aunt Petunia is hiding > in > > Book 7, since she won't answer his questions. > > > > 14. Harry will face down Uncle Vernon on his 17th birthday, since > he's > > then of age and therefore allowed to do magic and leaves the > Dursleys > > for good. > > > > 15. Harry will learn to Apparate. > > > > 16. Weasleys' Wizard Wheezes at 93 Diagon Alley gives great > assistance > > to Harry in his fight against Voldemort. > > Now Meri: > > 17: Neville is toast. He's gonna sacrifice himself to the cause and > go down like a massive hero, but not before getting a new wand, > shocking the entire by becoming the number two student in sixth > year, showing up Snape in Potions and beating Hermione in Herbology. > > 18: Ron and Hermione will finally get together on screen. > > 19: Harry will be reinstated as Quidditch Seeker and both Ginny and > Ron will stay on the team, too. > > 20: Dumbledore is going to die. > > 21: Hogwarts will be attacked (probably in the book 7 climax) and we > will get to see all the secrets of the school that we haven't seen > yet. > > 22: Percy is going to die. > > 23: Either Remus or Peter will die at the hand of the other. > > 24: Book 6 will end in a cliffhanger. At which point every HP fan > around the world will flip out and start sending Howlers to JKR. > > Meri Hickengruendler adds: 25. Neville is not toast and will be the classmate who becomes a teacher, either in Herbology or in DA. 26. Ginny, however, will die during the climax of book 7. At this time, she's Harry's girlfriend. 27. Sybill Trelawney will make a third prophecy. They always come in threes. But it won't be in book 6, but in book 7. 28. Dumbledore will die at the end of book 6 and McGonagall will become the new headmistress. 29. Moaning Myrtle will find out that it was Voldemort who killed her and seek revenge. Therefore the ghosts from Voldemorts past literally came back to haunt him. 30. Harry will destroy Voldemort for good without becoming an actual murderer. 31. Percy will be too ashamed to go back to his family, but he will begin to work against Voldemort. Percy will not die but instead will have to live with the mistakes he had made. 32. Snape however will die, in the final battle (which I agree will take place at Hogwarts), saving Harry. 33. At least one pair of Harry's grandparents (if not all of them) were killed by Voldemort or one of his minions. The attack that costed their lives might have been on James' and Lily's wedding (hey, I added the last part for the big-bang). Hickengruendler From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Fri Dec 3 17:20:08 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 17:20:08 -0000 Subject: Slytherin House again. Was: Re: Problem with OotP? (was: Pampering) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119157 Potioncat wrote : "The fact that Slytherin won the cup for 7 years in a row, tells me that there is more to them than we see now. The cup is based on points, awarded by teachers and by doing well in Quidditch. Certainly Slytherins didn't trick teachers into giving them points, and certainly if McGonagall thought Slytherins were cheating at Quidditch she would have done something about it." Del replies : I agree, but... Where did they get those points ? Academics ? I doubt it. On one hand, we are never presented with an obviously intelligent and hard-working Slytherin (in the current generation, that is -- Snape was probably just that in his time). Draco seems to be a good enough student, but he's nowhere on a par with Hermione, nor with students such as Percy Weasley or Ernie McMillan. On the other hand, the only truly stupid students we've met are all Slytherin : Crabbe and Goyle, of course, but also Montague and Flint. So I seriously doubt Slytherin got all those points from their academic results. There's also the Quidditch Cup. But from what we've seen so far ,the Slytherin team didn't win because they were exceptionally good, but because they were exceptionally *brutal*. I'm not saying that Slytherin ever was a bad team, but I don't think it was ever particularly better than the other teams. IMO, sheer strength and a willingness to use it seem to have been the reasons why Slytherin kept winning all those years. So it seems like Slytherin was winning the House Cup because they managed to win the Quidditch Cup, which they won because they were the most brutal players on the field. This does *not* look good. As usual where Slytherin is concerned. Potioncat wrote : " Harry's relationship with Slytherins is strained for two reasons, Draco and Snape. But his relationship with members of other houses isn't all roses either. He's had disagreements and misunderstandings with those students too." Del replies : I agree, but unfortunately it's not just Harry who has troubles getting along with Slytherin. *All* the Houses despise Slytherin ! Remember how all of them cheered when Gryffindor won over Slytherin in PS/SS ? And this attitude remained consistent all throughout the four following years. *Nobody* likes the Slytherins, not just Harry. Potioncat wrote : " I think JKR is tricking us into believing the sterotypes about Slytherin, and will pull the rug from under us later on." Del replies : I hope, I hope, I hope !! Potioncat wrote : "I still maintain that ambition and cunning are not vices. Although ambition could drive a person in the wrong direction." Del replies : Fred and George are rather ambitious (and show quite some cunning too), and many people have pointed out that Hermione displays quite a lot of cunning sometimes. So obviously JKR doesn't consider those qualities to be evil in and of themselves, though she does show, through Fudge, Crouch and Percy, that ambition must be kept in check. For that matter, most Slytherins don't seem to be really ambitious or cunning. Crabbe and Goyle are neither. Pansy doesn't seem to be cunning and she's only relatively ambitious (she's happy leading her own gang, while being led herself by Draco). Even Draco, the current most visible representative of Slytherin, seems only moderately ambitious and cunning (unlike his father, who is both very ambitious and very cunning). And as far as I can see, Draco is still the most ambitious and the most cunning of all the current Slytherins. I'm not really going anywhere with this. I guess I'm just still not satisfied with the description of Slytherin House as it is. It looks more like a garbage can than anything else to me. Del From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Fri Dec 3 17:31:40 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 17:31:40 -0000 Subject: Detached?Lupin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119158 > Casey: > I love Lupin and don't see him as ESE. Still, I was very > disturbed by the fact that everyone was looking for this known > murderer yet Lupin kept important information about a possible way to > capture him quiet. Lupin knew, like the rest, that Black would > probably try to find Harry and still he never gave Dumbledore, or > anyone, the information that Black was an animagis (sp?). Why? What > could be served by keeping that bit of information a secret. Why put > Harry at more risk than he had to? What better way to prove to the > others that he, a werewolf, was to be trusted? Instead he kept his > knowledge to himself putting, not only Harry, but every other > student at risk. > > Casey, stopping before she confinces herself that ESE!Lupin theory > is correct. Neri: In the level of the story I think the answer to this is very clear. Deep in his heart Lupin could never really believe that Sirius is indeed evil, despite all the "evidence" for it. So he made up excuses, and these excuses saved Sirius' life, because he would have probably been caught and executed if it was known he was a dog animagus. The heart is not always a bad guide. I find this explanation at least as likely as the ESE explanation, and more likely than Lupin's own explanation that he didn't tell DD because he couldn't face admitting that he had hidden the animagi story from him as a student. After all, this fault happened 20 years ago and it was the fault of Sirius, James and Peter more than it was Remus' fault. It is typical for Lupin to take all the responsibility upon himself this way. Neri From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Fri Dec 3 17:44:23 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 17:44:23 -0000 Subject: Knowing it was Snape (was: What has Snape seen) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119159 ~Eloise: > It just seems to me that JKR treats memories a bit oddly. > If she does it for the Pensieve, then I think it's quite possible > that she does so for the memories accessed in Occlumency. > > Although it's an attractive idea to compare those memories of > Snape's which Harry accesses with those of his which Snape > accesses, unfortunately I don't think we are in a position to > compare like with like. Remember that when we hear about the > memories that Snape accesses, we are hearing it from Harry's > perspective, they are memories welling up in his mind and we are > seeing them from his POV: they are narrated in the first person, as > it were. We don't know *how* Snape sees them, just that he does. > > Again, when we see Snape's memories, we are seeing them from > Harry's perspective and they *seem* to be told in the third person. > We don't know if that is Snape's experience of them; perhaps he > is "experiencing" sitting in his bedroom shooting flies, rather > than watching a figure doing it. > > We are told that Legilimency is an imprecise art, that it is *not* > mind reading. Perhaps this third person viewpoint is one of its > limitations. SSSusan: These are excellent points, Eloise. Eloise: > It could also be simply a literary device consequential to the fact > that the book being about Harry, we are familiar with Harry's > memories, but not with Snape's. JKR is dropping in the first really > concrete hints about Snape's early background and it would have > been awkward and taken a great more description than she probably > wanted to put in to describe the events from Snape's childhood in > such a way that we recognised them for what they were without > letting us see him in the action. If Harry had experienced the > adults fighting without seeing the small dark haired boy crying in > the corner, it could easily have been mistaken for one of his own > memories. Letting us see Snape in the memories allows the > information to be conveyed far more economically and therefore, I > think, more effectively. SSSusan: Again, this makes sense. It *is* an efficient way to tell a quick story & convey information to the reader. The *only* red flag that's still going up for me is that uncomfortable sense that JKR likes to toy with us concerning what we think we *know*. It'll probably all come out to be that these are flat-out memories of Snape's childhood and that the yelling man is his father. But I still won't be surprised if she pulls a fast one on us, regarding at least one of them having a twist. Siriusly Snapey Susan From willsonkmom at msn.com Fri Dec 3 17:47:16 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 17:47:16 -0000 Subject: Slytherin House again. Was: Re: Problem with OotP? (was: Pampering) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119160 > > Potioncat wrote : > "The fact that Slytherin won the cup for 7 years in a row, tells me > that there is more to them than we see now. The cup is based on > points, awarded by teachers and by doing well in Quidditch. Certainly > Slytherins didn't trick teachers into giving them points, and > certainly if McGonagall thought Slytherins were cheating at Quidditch > she would have done something about it." > > Del replies : > I agree, but... Where did they get those points ? > > Academics ? I doubt it. On one hand, we are never presented with an > obviously intelligent and hard-working Slytherin (in the current > generation, that is -- Snape was probably just that in his time). > Draco seems to be a good enough student, but he's nowhere on a par > with Hermione, nor with students such as Percy Weasley or Ernie > McMillan. On the other hand, the only truly stupid students we've met > are all Slytherin : Crabbe and Goyle, of course, but also Montague and > Flint. So I seriously doubt Slytherin got all those points from their > academic results. > snip big time > I'm not really going anywhere with this. I guess I'm just still not > satisfied with the description of Slytherin House as it is. It looks > more like a garbage can than anything else to me. > Potioncat: Yes! That's it entirely. Given the description of Slytherin traits, we should see a very different House! We should be see talented students working hard and doing what they need to do to be successful. Some of course would be cheating to get good marks and some would be studying. Not everyone would be bright, but everyone should be driven to succeed within their abilities. There should be the Debating Club captain, the Junior Ministry of Magic Club, the Young Witches Association officers, all the right "looks good on a resume" activities. Of course, Harry doesn't belong to any of those clubs either, so maybe he never runs into that sort of Slytherin. So has JKR made a mistake? Or does she she see ambition differently? Back to points, Slytherin still gets high points (even before Umbridge) Where are they coming from if Crabbe, Goyle and Malfoy are the typical students? You made a point of the Slytherin team being a brutal team, not a good team. But it isn't winning the cup either. Who knows what previous teams were like? I remember being in school eons ago and the three local high schools all had sterotypes. One was full of dull, stupid farmers. (With a big strong football team...not much on strategy) One had untrustworthy, rich city slickers with a well equiped football team, excelling at cheating and of course there was my high school...fine, outstanding individuals we were with a team that played hard and fair. Sound familiar? Potioncat From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Fri Dec 3 17:53:27 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 17:53:27 -0000 Subject: Hogwarts letters Re: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119161 Kim wrote: " The point of visiting Muggleland and the main draw for Hermione would be her loved ones, and she'll have plenty to talk to them about, and nothing to hide since they know about and accept magic. And I don't suppose the Muggle neighbors would be likely invites to a semi-annual Granger family gathering, would you? " Del replies : That's precisely what I've been trying to explain : the Muggleborns might not be cut off from their Muggle *family*, but they do end up being cut off from the Muggle *world*. Hermione still sees her parents, and we can reasonably assume she'll keep on visiting them every now and then when she grows up, but that's about it. No Muggle friends, no Muggle activities, no Muggle whatever. It doesn't have to be that drastic, I agree. Dean still has that poster of his favourite Muggle football team, and I suppose many adult Muggleborns still have Muggle artefacts in their homes, and talk a bit about the Muggle World to their kids. They can even keep in contact with their best Muggle friends, and keep going to a Muggle church for example. But they are no more *a part* of the Muggle World. They've emigrated to the WW, and they've left the MW behind. No matter how often they go back there, they are now citizens of the WW. By the way : I'm wondering what happens to them on a legal level in the Muggle World? After a while, their abscence from the MW must look suspicious, the administration must be starting to be concerned. How do they deal with that ? Del From pjarrett at gmail.com Fri Dec 3 03:24:25 2004 From: pjarrett at gmail.com (Patrick Jarrett) Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 22:24:25 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Book Two Discoveries! In-Reply-To: References: <20041203001743.84350.qmail@web51403.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <3def328f041202192449e5864b@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119162 On Fri, 03 Dec 2004 02:21:57 -0000, Jim Ferer wrote: > Jim Ferrer: > There's no proof for it, but the arguments are persuasive; but I've > always had a problem with the theory on general principles. The wizard > world intermarries a lot, and by averages there should be Heirs of > Gryffindor all over the place. You'd expect you could find, after a > thousand years, people who were heirs of all four Founders at once. > Our world, the Muggle world, is a world where Ronald Reagan and Jimmy > Carter were sixth cousins. We're all more closely related than we think. > > Even with the "intellectual" problems with it, I wouldn't be surprised > whatsoever if the Heir of Gryffindor theory turned out true. Patrick speaketh: I think it is very interesting that information on the founders is so sparse. Which makes me wonder. It isn't JKRs style to simply not provide the clues, she seems very big on subtle hints rather than simply springing something on us. I would agree, there are clues for Harry being a special Gryffindor, perhaps a descendant of Godric, but they are tenuous. And, in my opinion, completely circumstantial. Harry is unique, that is shown over and over, and sure Fawkes brought the hat and sword to him - but that could be related to the fact that Harry is tied to Fawkes through his wand. My other big big issue is that the Hat didn't immediately know. The Hat was Godric's. Shouldn't it be able to recognize his heir? I'm not convinced. -- Patrick From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Fri Dec 3 17:56:33 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 17:56:33 -0000 Subject: Slytherin House again. Was: Re: Problem with OotP? (was: Pampering) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119163 > Potioncat: > > We haven't seen any "nice" Slytherins, but I find it hard to > believe there aren't any. Neri: Actually we do have canon for one "nice" Slytherin. This was Tom Riddle of course, who was appreciated by teachers and students and who could always charm the people he needed. It is the "nice" Slytherins who are the most dangerous. Neri From harriet_lupin at yahoo.com Fri Dec 3 01:28:03 2004 From: harriet_lupin at yahoo.com (Marianne Adams) Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 17:28:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: Who's the HBP? (Re: "Prince" in HBP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041203012803.7802.qmail@web51403.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119164 Karen wrote: > I believe that the HBP is a new character, that is somehow related to a known character in the story. Possibly one of those uppity "purebloods", a "love" child perhaps of one of the DE's who works with Harry and Co. against the DE's. It would be an interesting twist!! ;-) The possibility does exist that the HBP could be someone new (JKR is known to introduce new characters to the HP universe) -- I have considered that myself... but I like the Lupin thought better so I'll stick to it for now but I'm always open to new thoughts..... How about Shaemus Finnegan? Isn't he a half-blood? Didn't he say so in the first book? He and Harry did have a parting of ways of sorts in Phoenix.... even though they made up in the end.... Just another thought..... Harriet From willsonkmom at msn.com Fri Dec 3 18:01:21 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 18:01:21 -0000 Subject: Slytherin House again. Was: Re: Problem with OotP? (was: Pampering) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119166 > Neri: > > Actually we do have canon for one "nice" Slytherin. This was Tom > Riddle of course, who was appreciated by teachers and students and > who could always charm the people he needed. > > It is the "nice" Slytherins who are the most dangerous. > Potioncat: Oh! Good point! And add Barty Crouch, Jr who made the comment about how easy it was to manipulate good people. We really should appreciate snarky, old Snape more! Potioncat From pjarrett at gmail.com Fri Dec 3 13:34:00 2004 From: pjarrett at gmail.com (Patrick Jarrett) Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 08:34:00 -0500 Subject: Trusting characters Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3def328f04120305345f227679@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119167 Kizor wrote: > Fourth: We don't know if a person Apparating can bring another person > who can't Apparate with him. > Patrick: I think we can safely say you can't do that. Why else would Mr. Weasley taken them all to a Portkey for the Quidditch match? Mr. Weasley surely would have preferred to apparate like Bill and Charley (Percy? Twins? I forget) did. -- Patrick From foxmoth at qnet.com Fri Dec 3 18:03:35 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 18:03:35 -0000 Subject: Detached?Lupin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119168 > Neri: > > In the level of the story I think the answer to this is very clear. > Deep in his heart Lupin could never really believe that Sirius is indeed evil, despite all the "evidence" for it. So he made up excuses, and these excuses saved Sirius' life, because he would have probably been caught and executed if it was known he was a dog animagus. The heart is not always a bad guide. < Pippin: This makes hash out of Lupin's speech to Harry in PoA ch 14 about not risking his life to go to Hogsmeade. If Sirius Black wasn't dangerous, what was? Neri: > I find this explanation at least as likely as the ESE explanation, > and more likely than Lupin's own explanation that he didn't tell DD because he couldn't face admitting that he had hidden the animagi story from him as a student. After all, this fault happened 20 years ago and it was the fault of Sirius, James and Peter more than it was Remus' fault. It is typical for Lupin to take all the responsibility upon himself this way.< Pippin: Lupin was a prefect. It *was* his responsibility. Though, like you, I think that wasn't the only reason he wouldn't go to Dumbledore. Ultimately Lupin's problem is he believes he's done something Dumbledore would never forgive. What it is, we don't know yet. Pippin From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Fri Dec 3 18:04:40 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 18:04:40 -0000 Subject: Slytherin House again. Was: Re: Problem with OotP? (was: Pampering) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119169 Pippin wrote : " All Dumbledore can legitimately do in a free society is encourage independent thought and hope the Slytherins will see for themselves that ultimately a mixed and equal society is not only functional but stronger." Del replies : He can hope that for *all* the students, because the Slytherins are far from being the only ones who don't believe in true equality. Ron showed anti-Giant discrimination, both he and Seamus showed great disrespect for the Hufflepuffs (when Cedric was chosen as a Champion), someone in Harry's class didn't know that the Centaurs were an ancient race and had not been bred by Hagrid, Fred and George hissed a boy who had been Sorted into Slytherin, and so on. And while I was reading your post, it came to my mind how ironic it was that Tom Riddle became LV. If Slytherin had had it his way, Tom would never have been admitted at Hogwarts to start with, he couldn't have championed the pureblood superiority issues, and the WW would have been spared the VWs. Del From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Fri Dec 3 18:32:43 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 18:32:43 -0000 Subject: Slytherin House again. Was: Re: Problem with OotP? (was: Pampering) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119170 Potioncat wrote : "Yes! That's it entirely. Given the description of Slytherin traits, we should see a very different House!" Del replies : Exactly. We agree that the choice Slytherin traits (apart from purebloodedness) are quite all right, and yet the overwhelming impression is that the Slytherin students are not at all all right. That's a major discrepancy, and we have been given no clue to explain it, except for the one I can't accept : that they have an evil nature. Potioncat wrote : "We should be see talented students working hard and doing what they need to do to be successful. Some of course would be cheating to get good marks and some would be studying. Not everyone would be bright, but everyone should be driven to succeed within their abilities." Del replies : We've seen those things in non-Slytherin students, but not in Slytherin ones yet. I can of course imagine that it's only because Harry never runs into those hard-working Slytherins. I really hope we'll get to meet at least one of them in HBP, maybe one that did very well in his OWLs ? Potioncat wrote : " There should be the Debating Club captain, the Junior Ministry of Magic Club, the Young Witches Association officers, all the right "looks good on a resume" activities." Del replies : :-) Cool-sounding clubs ! Potioncat replies : "Of course, Harry doesn't belong to any of those clubs either, so maybe he never runs into that sort of Slytherin." Del replies : I hope so. But if they do exist, they seem to keep a singularly low-profile, since we never hear of them even in passing. Well then of course, we had never heard of the existence of *any* club before OoP, so I guess I'm being too demanding :-) Potioncat wrote : "Back to points, Slytherin still gets high points (even before Umbridge) Where are they coming from if Crabbe, Goyle and Malfoy are the typical students? " Del replies : Well, I believe that Draco can be quite a good student when he applies himself to the task, so I can see that he would earn quite some points in those classes where he's not in competition with the best student in his year (Hermione). But Crabbe and Goyle ?? Nobody, starting with the Trio, even understands how they managed to pass each year, so there's no way they can earn many points in class. Potioncat wrote : "You made a point of the Slytherin team being a brutal team, not a good team. But it isn't winning the cup either. Who knows what previous teams were like?" Del replies : Slytherin doesn't win those years because Gryffindor has a prodigy player (Harry), just like it didn't win back when Gryffindor had another prodigy (Charlie). But it won every single year in-between, including those last years when the Gryffindor team was almost the same as when Harry arrived (and so presumably very good, since Harry's early teammates are supposed to be good players). Potioncat wrote : "I remember being in school eons ago and the three local high schools all had sterotypes. One was full of dull, stupid farmers. (With a big strong football team...not much on strategy) One had untrustworthy, rich city slickers with a well equiped football team, excelling at cheating and of course there was my high school...fine, outstanding individuals we were with a team that played hard and fair." Del replies : Think hard : were there any British exchange students, or British teacher assistants, or anything like that ? Any people who might have mentioned those high schools' reputations to JKR ? ;-) Seriously though : did you ever get any insight as to how the students in those other schools saw you and your schoolmates ? Might be interesting in figuring out the Slytherins' mentality. Del From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Fri Dec 3 18:35:53 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 18:35:53 -0000 Subject: Slytherin House again. Was: Re: Problem with OotP? (was: Pampering) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119171 Neri wrote : " Actually we do have canon for one "nice" Slytherin. This was Tom Riddle of course, who was appreciated by teachers and students and who could always charm the people he needed." Del replies : Argh ! Lol ! Ah well, I can always reply that "nice" isn't the same as "good", and that we are still waiting for a *good* Slytherin ;-) Del From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 3 18:44:07 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 18:44:07 -0000 Subject: Hogwarts letters Re: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119172 Kim wrote: The point of visiting Muggleland and the main draw for Hermione would be her loved ones, and she'll have plenty to talk to them about, and nothing to hide since they know about and accept magic. And I don't suppose the Muggle neighbors would be likely invites to a semi-annual Granger family gathering, would you? Del replied: > That's precisely what I've been trying to explain : the Muggleborns > might not be cut off from their Muggle *family*, but they do end up > being cut off from the Muggle *world*. Hermione still sees her > parents, and we can reasonably assume she'll keep on visiting them > every now and then when she grows up, but that's about it. No Muggle > friends, no Muggle activities, no Muggle whatever. Now Kim responds: Well, now I really agree with you. But I guess I was seeing the Muggle world (vs. Muggle family) as being so much less important to Muggleborns already that being cut off from it wouldn't make a great deal of difference to them anyway. Maybe I should have said Hermione will keep one part of her heart (not one foot) firmly planted in the Muggle world and the other part in the WW. And so we probably saw eye to eye all along! Then again, we are supposing that Hermione will even *live* to see that day (I'm focusing on H. since she's the most prominent Muggleborn in the books; Dean (I mistook his name for Seamus in earlier post) is not as important as Hermione, not to me at least ;-)) and also supposing that nothing so dreadful will happen to make her want to give up on the WW entirely and go back to living full-time in the MW (as suggested by either your or other posters' earlier posts). I think that would be her option too, to turn her back, so to speak, on the WW. She could still use her wand with the curtains drawn just for fun... Then again, aren't the two worlds still inextricably linked, even if JKR says she will never integrate them again? There's still so much overlap. Besides, the WW would die out without the MW, it seems to me. Oh, how I wish witches and wizards would show themselves again, it's so dull out here without them. Del continued: > It doesn't have to be that drastic, I agree. Dean still has that > poster of his favourite Muggle football team, and I suppose many adult Muggleborns still have Muggle artefacts in their homes, and talk a bit about the Muggle World to their kids. They can even keep in contact with their best Muggle friends, and keep going to a Muggle church for example. But they are no more *a part* of the Muggle World. They've emigrated to the WW, and they've left the MW behind. No matter how often they go back there, they are now citizens of the WW. Kim now: Yes, this is true. These seem to be a bit (or a lot?) like the choices real world immigrants have to make. And so, not being an immigrant myself (though I am the granddaughter of immigrants), I would bow to those who know better firsthand what that's like. Del continued: > By the way : I'm wondering what happens to them on a legal level in > the Muggle World? After a while, their abscence from the MW must look suspicious, the administration must be starting to be concerned. How do they deal with that? Kim now: Yikes! Hopefully they would just fall through the cracks like so many folks do out here in the real world, for better or worse. For Muggleborns evading the MW administration, it would be for the better, IMO. P.S. Thanks to Alla in her post (119123) for quoting where JKR said the WW and MW will never reunite. Of course there's always fanfic for that...! And what about when JKR writes book 8...? ;-) Kim From willsonkmom at msn.com Fri Dec 3 18:48:54 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 18:48:54 -0000 Subject: Slytherin House again. Was: Re: Problem with OotP? (was: Pampering) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119173 > Potioncat wrote : > "You made a point of the Slytherin team being a brutal team, not a > good team. But it isn't winning the cup either. Who knows what > previous teams were like?" > > Del replies : > Slytherin doesn't win those years because Gryffindor has a prodigy > player (Harry), just like it didn't win back when Gryffindor had > another prodigy (Charlie). But it won every single year in-between, > including those last years when the Gryffindor team was almost the > same as when Harry arrived (and so presumably very good, since Harry's > early teammates are supposed to be good players). Potioncat: And McGonagall and Snape have a very strong rivalry going. So I'm sure the two teams have been competitive with each other....no, I mean comparable to each other. It could be that Slytherins had several good players who graduated just before Harry arrived. Look at how bad the Gryffindors see their team as being in OoP. McGonagall doesn't seem to manage her team, other than to help Wood find a seeker. Perhaps Snape doesn't either. You'd think he'd go for a different approach than brute force. Could it be that the two teachers respect the student leadership model in this case? Then again, maybe we just don't see the Gryffindor Team Captain meeting with McGonagall. Potioncat who is the very worst person to be discussing sports! From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Fri Dec 3 18:52:26 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 18:52:26 -0000 Subject: Detached?Lupin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119174 > Pippin: > This makes hash out of Lupin's speech to Harry in PoA ch 14 > about not risking his life to go to Hogsmeade. If Sirius Black > wasn't dangerous, what was? > Neri: I don't doubt that Lupin consciously thought Sirius WAS guilty and dangerous. Only deep in his subconscious he could not accept it ("Yes, I knew him. Or I thought I did"). So he rationalized the best compromise between his mind and his heart: not endangering Harry needlessly, but also not revealing the secret that would be Sirius' death sentence. In hindsight it was the correct compromise. It saved an innocent man's life. > Pippin: > Lupin was a prefect. It *was* his responsibility. Neri: Lupin would have probably agreed with you on this. He is that type. However, James was a headboy, and it was he (not Remus) who was the unregistered animagus. I'd say this is even more of a responsibility. Lupin revealing his best friends' secret would have been sneaking, which is regarded as morally lacking in British schools even when it is strictly proper. Neri From willsonkmom at msn.com Fri Dec 3 18:53:59 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 18:53:59 -0000 Subject: Slytherin House again. Was: Re: Problem with OotP? (was: Pampering) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119175 > Del replies : > Argh ! Lol ! > > Ah well, I can always reply that "nice" isn't the same as "good", and > that we are still waiting for a *good* Slytherin ;-) > Potioncat: So we have our good guy Snape who isn't a nice guy. We have our nice guy Riddle who isn't a good guy. He of course became someone who is neither good nor nice. Will we have a nice, good guy Slytherin?....You know, that just doesn't sound right. I suspect that Phinias Nigellus is as good as it gets. From stevejjen at earthlink.net Fri Dec 3 18:57:33 2004 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 18:57:33 -0000 Subject: Detached?Lupin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119176 > > Jen: JKR seems to view evil as a choice problem more than > anything. A concious choice to pursue a worldview, a community > and a doctrine that gives rise to oppression, prejudice, and > corrupt or extremist activities. So far Lupin has not been > indicted as one of these people.< > > We have no evidence Lupin has engaged in pure-blood > ideaology, Muggle torture, employment within a corrupt > government, or affiliation with people engaging in nefarious > activities< Pippin: > We don't? > Trying to kill Peter was extremist activity, at least Harry > thought so. Jen: We differ here. Murder is legally and morally wrong. Extremist connotates activites which are highly unusual and radical in nature. Committing murder can be a part of an extremist activity, but it isn't extremist in and of itself. Otherwise we would see far fewer murders in the world and far more evil overlords. Harry indeed thought Lupin & Sirius were wrong to murder Pettigrew, and he didn't want to see them become "murderers" because of him. Harry didn't appear to equate their potential crime with choosing a lifetime of service to Voldemort. Pippin: > Failing to inform on Sirius was abetting someone whom he > believed had engaged in pure blood ideology, Muggle torture > and affiliation with people engaging in nefarious activities. > > Lupin's job was more important to him than Harry's skin, and if > that wasn't choosing power over love, what is? Jen: That's Lupin's assessment of the situation, yes. Harry didn't seem to view it that way, nor did Dumbledore. Fudge was told by Snape that the Trio was consorting with a 'murderer and werewolf,' implicating Lupin by association, but nothing comes of it. Apparently in Potterverse, Lupin's self-perceived crime of omission was not viewed that way by anyone else. I think if we're supposed to condemn Lupin's choice in that situation, JKR would show condemnation by the other characters. Otherwise, she's created a batch of accomplices with equally questionable behavior if the 'truth' comes out later. Jen Reese From tzakis1225 at netzero.com Fri Dec 3 19:13:58 2004 From: tzakis1225 at netzero.com (demetra1225) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 19:13:58 -0000 Subject: Reputations (was Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119177 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: [snip] I have no trouble believing that somehow Severus' reputation > concerning Dark Arts affected James' opinion of him, but I think > there will be a surprising twist to that in later books. And it may > involve Sirius' interpretation of the facts either as an adult > looking back, or as a student at the time. Demetra: I agree. As I try to catch up on the 300 or so posts I am behind in reading, I have been following this very interesting thread. It is no secret that I am a bit of a Snape-ophile, and I try to figure out what makes him tick. I also try to figure out where the obvious mutual hatred between Severus and Sirius/James came from. I hope JKR does divulge more about their history in future books, but in the meantime I have cooked up my own version of a backstory. I do acknowledge that James' enmity towards Severus has some basis in his hatred of the Dark Arts. I think that Severus and Sirius both come from families associated with Dark Arts. We know that Sirius' home was full of Dark Objects. I think we can assume they were into Dark Arts. We know that they were pure-blood elitists. Since Severus knew so many curses when he arrived at Hogwarts, I assume that Severus's family members were also nasty bastards who were into the Dark Arts. Judging from what we've seen of Mommy Dearest, I bet Sirius knew just as many curses. Now, I don't think that the Snape's were as "pure" or as rich as the Blacks, but they were very similar in all other ways. I agree with others who have speculated that Severus and Sirius knew each pre-Hogwarts. I don't think they were friends, but I think they knew each other. So why did 2 boys from such similar backgrounds end up hating each other? Better yet, why would a boy from such a background end up a Gryffindor and best friends with James? Some have proposed that Sirius came to Hogwarts hating his family and the Dark Arts and found a natural ally in James. I just don't think it's likely that Sirius had already rejected his family prior to coming to Hogwarts. Why would he? Where would he have been exposed to a different view? The Blacks certainly weren't having Sunday dinner with the Weasleys. I think the impetus for the rejection of his upbringing was James. I think that Sirius met James on the Hogwarts Express, like Harry met Ron. They hit it off. James shared with Sirius that he came from a long line of Gryffindors who despised the Dark Arts. Sirius, not wanting to ruin this potential friendship, doesn't share that he comes from a family of Slytherins who practice the Dark Arts (and later asks the Sorting Hat to place him in Gryffindor). Sirius does offer up to James that Severus Snape's family members are all Slytherins who are into the Dark Arts. After all, what better for young boys to bond over, than a mutual enemy? Thus, the beginning of Severus as the target of James and Snape's taunting. Severus, having much the same personality we see in the adult Snape, does give back as good as he gets. And Severus, knowing full well what Sirius Black's background is, sees Sirius as either a betrayer of his heritage (by denying it) or as a coward for condemning Severus to James' ridicule while hiding his own background. Demetra From stonehenge.orders at verizon.net Fri Dec 3 20:28:08 2004 From: stonehenge.orders at verizon.net (kjirstem) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 20:28:08 -0000 Subject: Hogwarts letters Re: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119178 > > Del: > > By the way : I'm wondering what happens to them on a legal level > in > > the Muggle World? After a while, their abscence from the MW must > look suspicious, the administration must be starting to be > concerned. > How do they deal with that? > > Kim: > Yikes! Hopefully they would just fall through the cracks like so > many folks do out here in the real world, for better or worse. For > Muggleborns evading the MW administration, it would be for the > better, IMO. kjirstem: There is some indication that at least the Prime Minister knows about the WW (isn't there? I could have sworn there was but I can't find it now...). I wonder how they deal with taxes. I'd assume the WW pays for the Ministry of Magic, etc, but you'd think someone in the MW would get suspicious of Muggle-borns when they don't pay taxes. I guess those Muggles never notice nuffink. The thing that bugs me a little about all the Muggle-borns falling through the cracks of the RW is that it corresponds pretty well with Vernon Dursley's view of the WW. It means he's basically right - that wizarding folk aren't fine, upstanding members of society (at least as he knows it) - I think that would have to be true for them not to be noticed. I hate the thought that he might have some basis for that conclusion. Kjirstem From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 3 20:30:21 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 20:30:21 -0000 Subject: Slytherin House again. Was: Re: Problem with OotP? (was: Pampering) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119179 Pippin wrote: Assuming Hogwarts worked then as it does now, the founders were willing to teach Slytherin students, and to have their students taught by Slytherin himself. I am saying that the other three founders did not find Slytherin's professed ethics or his criteria for selecting students abhorrent, nor by and large does the wizarding world today. Kim here: Pippin, are you sure that the other founders didn't find Slytherin's ethics abhorrent, despite the fact that the current Hogwarts admin. still maintains a Slytherin House? Apparently there was enough of a rift between Slytherin and the other 3 founders that Slytherin saw fit to leave the school, and not only that, to leave behind the deadly Chamber of Secrets and its muggleborn-killing monster. Pippin continued: Historically, the theories which became the foundation of today's racist ideologies were not invented to justify racial discrimination. They were invented by people with no concept of social or genetic change as part of the legitimate attempt to explain how people in different parts of the world could be so physically and culturally different. Kim here: Were you referring to "the foundation of today's racist ideologies" as in the real world? If so, I guess I disagree with what you're saying, but maybe that's an off-topic discussion? Pippin wrote: The wizards, at least those who are isolated from the Muggle world, are in the same situation. To them, theories of racial inferiority or degeneration may well seem something about which people of good will can disagree, just as people in my country nowadays can disagree about the death penalty. Both sides think their position is the moral one, but there are many who wouldn't characterize the other side as "bad", just mistaken. Kim here: The problem I see with that is that racism and the death penalty (or their counterparts in the fictional WW) aren't just theories to be discussed and perhaps disagreed upon, but are life and death matters. Granted though, they may not be life and death matters for the ones who have the wherewithal to engage in theoretical discussions about them. Pippin wrote: We haven't heard any adult except Hagrid denounce Slytherin House as bad. IMO, if Dumbledore tried to do it, he would either lose his position or the Slytherin parents would pull their children out of school. All Dumbledore can legitimately do in a free society is encourage independent thought and hope the Slytherins will see for themselves that ultimately a mixed and equal society is not only functional but stronger. Since they respect independence and strength, the outlook is not unhopeful, IMO. Kim now: I'd definitely agree with you there, except maybe for the last sentence. I think it would be a bit too hopeful on DD's part if he thought that Slytherins as a whole would ever embrace the idea of a mixed and equal society. There is of course hope for individual Slytherins. It seems that the wizarding world (not to mention the real world) will always produce those who in each generation see themselves as "better" than others. Unfortunately this may be a sad fact of life that has stood the test of many centuries. I'm not sure wizard nature or human nature will ever progress to the point of total acceptance of the "other" until the living world has returned to its original state of primordial goo... and maybe not even then ;-) Kim (who is obviously in a rather unhopeful mood) From asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 3 20:36:06 2004 From: asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 20:36:06 -0000 Subject: Slytherin House again. - A Quick General Note In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119180 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: ...a nice post whick I 'snipped', sorry. bboyminn: Just a few general notes- The first and most important is that there are a few hundred (or a hundred of so, depending on what you believe) Slytherns we /haven't/ met, and half a dozen, or so, that we have met. I don't think we can judge all Slytherins by the example of less than 1/16th of their population. Take Crabbe and Goyle, people rightly say that they are too stupid to be cunning and ambitious, but they were cunning and ambitious enough to attach themselves to the popular and ambitious son of a very wealthy, influential, powerfull, well-connected, extremely cunning, ruthless, and ambitions man; Lucius Malfoy. Their road to success is to ride the coattails of Draco. It doesn't matter that they won't rise to the top, they have sufficiently /sucked-up/ that they will be standing at the side of the man who is likely to rise to the top, and that's a lot closer to the top than most people get. In addition, I don't think the Sorting Hat makes it's decision on superficial or outward traits. Internally, in their inner mental dialog, Crabbe and Goyle could be very ambitious and cunning, but too extrenally stupid to pull off their desires on their own. So, as I said, they wisely attach themselves to someone who is very likely to insure their success. I don't think that was a clear conscious plan on their part, but a subconscious guide that lead them. Point, how people appear on the outside never clearly defines their inner workings and subconscious desires, nor does it show their untapped abilities. For example, we would wrongly judge Neville to be a Gryffindor, if we only used outward signs. However, in small ways, his actions have shown that under the surface, beneath the insecurity, he really is a Gryffindor. In addition, few students are ever truly tested at their house traits. We assume Dean and Seamus are true Gryffindors, but what have they ever done to prove it; what outward sign are there that the belong in Gryffindor? I've said before that the hundred or so Slytherins that we don't see, we don't see because the never get in Harry's face, they never make it onto Harry's radar screen, as is clear by the fact the Harry didn't know the name of one Slytherin (the Thestral boy) that he had been in class with for years. I think those hundred or so Slytherins are just normal kids like Dean and Seamus, who want nothing more than to go to school and get on with their live. Students in whom the Sorting Hat saw deep subconscious characteristics and unrealized potential that defined their houses. For the record, an am repeatedly of file has a supporter of the "Good Slytherin" theory, and am very confident that we will see him/her/them in the next book. Just passing it along. Steve/bboyminn (was bboy_mn) From R.Vink2 at chello.nl Fri Dec 3 21:19:55 2004 From: R.Vink2 at chello.nl (Renee) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 21:19:55 -0000 Subject: Slytherin House again. Was: Re: Problem with OotP? (was: Pampering) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119181 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > > > > Del replies : > > Argh ! Lol ! > > > > Ah well, I can always reply that "nice" isn't the same as "good", > and > > that we are still waiting for a *good* Slytherin ;-) > > > > Potioncat: > So we have our good guy Snape who isn't a nice guy. > > We have our nice guy Riddle who isn't a good guy. He of course > became someone who is neither good nor nice. > > Will we have a nice, good guy Slytherin?....You know, that just > doesn't sound right. I suspect that Phinias Nigellus is as good as > it gets. Renee: But can we be sure Phineas Nigellus is really good? And though I like his texts, he doesn't strike me as particularly nice either. But he's dead, and being a painting he's a bit of a flat character, too. I'd really like to see some Slytherins who are a contemporaries of the Trio, are able to explain in a satisfactory way what they think is good about Slytherin, wouldn't want to be in any other house, but still join the DA and/or are shown to be anti-Voldemort. I'd also like Harry to think about the Sorting Hat's new song, and reconsider his attitude towards Slytherin, and wonder what makes these people tick. Renee From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 3 21:27:00 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 21:27:00 -0000 Subject: Knowing it was Snape (was: What has Snape seen) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119182 Carol earlier: > > The difference is that we're looking at Snape's memories, not the> student body of Hogwarts. He has to be present in all of them. Ergo, the lonely teenager zapping flies has to be Severus, as does the boy on the bucking broom. Harry is therefore most likely right in also identifying the small crying boy rather than the hook-nosed man as snape. He knows very well what the adult Snape looks like and he knows whose memories he's viewing. > SiriuslySnaapeySusan responded: > Once again we're at cross purposes. I don't understand why Snape > has to be IN each memory. I have all kinds of memories of people > and places and events, and sometimes the pictures I have in my mind > are of those *other* people and places: my grandfather smoking a > pipe; my mom & dad playing tennis; my brother graduating from med > school. I'm in the audience, as it were, and I don't believe that > if someone accessed my memories they'd see ME; rather, they'd see > those other individuals *as I saw them*, but I'd be nowhere in sight. Carol responds: True, in real life we see memories from our own perspective. But the memories conjured by the Legilimency spell, like those in the Pensieve, appear to be objectified representations. That is, they're not from the perspective of the person remembering them but from that of a third-person observer. So both Snape and Harry see nine-year-old Harry up in a tree, and both see four- or five-year-old Severus crying as his fther bullies his mother. The only difference between the Pensieve memories and those conjured by the Legilimency spell appears to be that one is fleeting and visual only; the other is substantial, involves at least three senses, and can be entered. But neither is a memory as you and I normally experience them. These are memories that a Legilimens like Voldemort or Dumbledore could see, and in which he would recognize at least one person--Snape or Harry. Even the memory of young Tom Riddle preserved in the diary operates on the same principle. The person whose memory it is is present in all the memories and visible to the outsider who views them, regardless of whether the means of viewing is the diary, some form of Legilimency, or the Pensieve. If this reasoning is valid, then a younger Snape is present in the three memories that Harry sees. Clearly the teenage boy stunning flies and the boy on the broom must be Snape, and quite probably the crying child is, too, simply because Harry would recognize the adult Snape, and surely he would wonder about Snape's wife and child if he thought Snape had had them. But no such question enters his mind. I think, too, that any such ultrapersonal memories, if they existed and related to Snape's opposition to Voldemort, would have been placed for safekeeping in the Pensieve. Once again, though there are occasions when we can and should distrust the narrator, I see no reason to distrust the identification of the fighting couple as little Severus's parents. It certainly makes more sense, IMO, as a partial explanation of his present character than a mysterious wife and child. The man abuses the woman in front of the child. If Snape would do that, would he also mourn the loss of those people, as we must assume that he does if we accept the Snape as husband scenario? It makes no sense to me. And if Harry can recognize an adolescent Snape, he can certainly recognize the adult Snape, whether he's twenty-two or thirty. Carol From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Fri Dec 3 21:34:50 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 21:34:50 -0000 Subject: Hogwarts letters Re: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119183 Kim wrote : " But I guess I was seeing the Muggle world (vs. Muggle family) as being so much less important to Muggleborns already that being cut off from it wouldn't make a great deal of difference to them anyway." Del replies : That's what I've been wondering about all along : how can ALL the Muggleborns we know apparently care so little about the world they grew up in ? One simple answer comes to my mind, though, now that I think of it : they probably simply don't realise what's going on. I guess one reason Hermione doesn't mind putting Harry over her parents is because she assumes that her parents will always be there for her, waiting for her patiently back in the safe Muggle World. It's an assumption all kids make, after all. Kim wrote : "Oh, how I wish witches and wizards would show themselves again, it's so dull out here without them." Del replies : I beg to differ ! I find the MW exciting enough the way it is ! Kim wrote : " These seem to be a bit (or a lot?) like the choices real world immigrants have to make. And so, not being an immigrant myself (though I am the granddaughter of immigrants), I would bow to those who know better firsthand what that's like." Del replies : I am an immigrant myself. That's why I am so concerned about this leaving behind the MW. I've left my home country behind me too, but it's not like with the WW and the MW : coming to my new country won't change me in ways that will prevent me from being truly happy again in my home country. If there had been such a possibility, I'm not sure I would have been so willing to come, even though I had a really good incentive to come. And I wasn't 11 either, nor did I come here on my own. But then again, the Muggleborn kids probably never realised how much they would be changed by the time they would leave Hogwarts. Del From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Fri Dec 3 21:40:52 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 21:40:52 -0000 Subject: Slytherin House again. Was: Re: Problem with OotP? (was: Pampering) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119184 Potioncat wrote : " So we have our good guy Snape who isn't a nice guy. We have our nice guy Riddle who isn't a good guy. He of course became someone who is neither good nor nice. Will we have a nice, good guy Slytherin?....You know, that just doesn't sound right. " Del replies : I know it doesn't sound right, and that's exactly what's bothering me. Why couldn't ambitious and cunning people be also quite good and nice, at least on an inter-personal level, when nothing is at stake ? As for Snape being a good guy, I still have my reservations. He's on the side of good, granted, but since we still don't know what his motives are, we can't be absolutely certain that he's good. Del From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 3 22:10:08 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 22:10:08 -0000 Subject: Slytherin House again. Was: Re: Problem with OotP? (was: Pampering) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119185 > Potioncat wrote: > " So we have our good guy Snape who isn't a nice guy. > > We have our nice guy Riddle who isn't a good guy. He of course became > someone who is neither good nor nice. > > Will we have a nice, good guy Slytherin?....You know, that just > doesn't sound right. " > Del replied: > I know it doesn't sound right, and that's exactly what's bothering me. > Why couldn't ambitious and cunning people be also quite good and nice, > at least on an inter-personal level, when nothing is at stake ? > > As for Snape being a good guy, I still have my reservations. He's on > the side of good, granted, but since we still don't know what his > motives are, we can't be absolutely certain that he's good. Kim here: FWIW, here are the definitions of ambitious and cunning (since I love definitions): Ambitious: 1. Possessing, or controlled by, ambition; greatly or inordinately desirous of power, honor, office, superiority, or distinction; 2. Strongly desirous. Cunning: 1. Knowing; skillful; dexterous; 2. Wrought with, or exhibiting, skill or ingenuity; ingenious; curious; 3. Crafty; sly; artful; designing; deceitful. I think those words often have negative connotations when used with people and for good reason. They tend to be people you can't really trust even on an inter-personal level. Maybe we just have to accept Slytherins for what they are or tend to be and not expect them to be otherwise. But if something good comes of their ambitiousness, great. And if they develop into people who are more than just cunning and ambitious, even better! And also FWIW, I already trust Snape. Not sure exactly why though. Kim From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Fri Dec 3 22:11:30 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 22:11:30 -0000 Subject: Slytherin House again. Was: Re: Problem with OotP? (was: Pampering) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119186 > Renee: > > I'd really like to see some Slytherins who are a contemporaries > of the Trio, are able to explain in a satisfactory way what they > think is good about Slytherin, wouldn't want to be in any other > house, but still join the DA and/or are shown to be anti-Voldemort. Neri: We perhaps have a sort of such person who didn't make it into canon. I'm talking about Mafalda (Weasley?) who was edited out of GoF. JKR tells us something about her in: http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/extrastuff_view.cfm?id=3 According to the above link, Mafalda was supposed to be "the most unpleasant child Mrs. Weasley has ever met". She's "nosy, eavesdropping Slytherin who likes to impress, she does not keep her mouth shut when she overhears their sons and daughters talking". So she's certainly NOT "nice". However, she's also gifted enough to be "a match for Hermione", and perhaps she doesn't believe in the pureblood ideology since her father is a stockbroker and she had spent the summer with the Weasleys, so she might qualify as "good". OK, I know this is not much, but the seekers of the mythical "good Slytherin" can't be too picky, and Mafalda perhaps proves that JKR doesn't reject the possibility of a good Slytherin completely. Neri From cat_kind at yahoo.com Fri Dec 3 22:14:47 2004 From: cat_kind at yahoo.com (cat_kind) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 22:14:47 -0000 Subject: New characters in HBP Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119187 We have the following possible new characters in HBP: A) The HBP: possibly new, almost certainly a character. B) Felix Felicis: certainly new, possibly a character. C) The lion-man (described on JKR's website some time back): certainly new and certainly a character. Possibly also: D) Godric Griffindor: Conceivably a character, as he first came up in Book 2, so fits the description of Possible Title for Book Two, if more of his story had been given there. E) Inhabitant of Spinners End: The main theory seems to be it's a place, so it doesn't seem too much of a stretch for it to have an owner. Okay so this is maybe far-fetched. F) New teacher of DADA (or Potions if Snape gets DADA) Surely some of these coincide? D can't be C, as the lion-man wears glasses, which wouldn't have been invented in GG's time. B can't really be E because Felix turns up much later than Spinners End. E could easily be an already known character, or a relative of theirs. Some people think A is also someone known, I disagree because of the "Prince of What?" question. Catkind's mad theories of the day: Felix is the lion-man is a teacher. The HBP is someone from GG's time, not Gryff himself but a student that Slytherin doesn't want to admit to the school. Someone we already know (Lupin's family? Luna's family) lives at Spinners End. Thoughts? catkind From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 3 22:21:26 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 22:21:26 -0000 Subject: Hogwarts letters Re: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119188 Kim wrote : "Oh, how I wish witches and wizards would show themselves again, it's so dull out here without them." Del replied : I beg to differ ! I find the MW exciting enough the way it is ! Kim responds now: I was only joking really! I agree it's already exciting in the Muggle world, and my life has been somewhat more exciting at times than I'd like. Although there are still way too many dullards out here for my liking. Of course it also depends on what a person considers exciting... Besides, I think the Muggle world (i.e. the real world) is already full of its own natural magic that many people don't even notice... Kim From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 3 22:29:49 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 22:29:49 -0000 Subject: Hogwarts letters Re: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119189 kjirstem wrote: There is some indication that at least the Prime Minister knows about the WW (isn't there? I could have sworn there was but I can't find it now...) Kim now: I think you're right. I remember something like that. Is it in OotP or PoA? kjirstem continued: I wonder how they deal with taxes. I'd assume the WW pays for the Ministry of Magic, etc, but you'd think someone in the MW would get suspicious of Muggle-borns when they don't pay taxes. I guess those Muggles never notice nuffink. The thing that bugs me a little about all the Muggle-borns falling through the cracks of the RW is that it corresponds pretty well with Vernon Dursley's view of the WW. It means he's basically right - that wizarding folk aren't fine, upstanding members of society (at least as he knows it) - I think that would have to be true for them not to be noticed. I hate the thought that he might have some basis for that conclusion. Kim: Well, unless the Muggleborns make a substantial drain on the public welfare, maybe they don't really owe any taxes. I think if they stick to living most of their lives in the WW, asking them to pay taxes in the MW would be kind of unfair. If they felt guilty though, they could always drop a galleon or two in some likely place -- can't see a Muggle turning away pure gold no matter what form it came in (of course now I can't remember if galleons even are pure gold...) Kim From gbannister10 at aol.com Fri Dec 3 22:45:08 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 22:45:08 -0000 Subject: OOP: The unknown power In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119190 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dungrollin" wrote: Dungrollin: > That's exactly the paragraph that I was talking about in the bit > you snipped. The point I was trying to make was that the > phrase `sacrificial love' is never used in canon (just like > `life debt' and `wandless magic'), and JKR has never > (to my knowledge - please correct me if I'm wrong) used it in an > interview. Geoff: No, but it is implied. DD says, "Your mother died to save you. If there is one thing Voldermort canot understand it is love." The juxtaposition of those two sentences gives a pretty good nod in the direction of sacrificial love. In GOF, Voldemort acknowledges that sacrifice was part of the equation... "You know that on the night I lost my powers and my body, I tried to kill him. His mother died in the attempt to save him..... ...His mother left upon him the traces of her sacrifice...." Dungrollin: > Indeed. What do we mean by love, and sacrificial love, at that? I > would disagree that lifeboat crews are a good example. Do they all > *love* the unknown people they're risking their necks for? Not > slushy love, definitely, but IMO not love at all. And in order for > it to qualify under `sacrificial love', it would have to be > the love for these strangers that *causes* them to risk their > necks. I might just about stretch to `compassion' in a few > cases, but that's not the same thing. Geoff: Which brings me back to a point I have been banging on about in the past at various times. In English, we have not managed to cope with the linguistic problems of the four Greek words which C.S Lewis called the "Four Loves" - eros, philos, storge and agape. The lifeboatmen I know personally go out because they feel a call - for want of a better word - to go and help, save, rescue those who are in a particular need. They do not "love" them in the sense of wanting to have a physical relationship with them, they do not have the same feelings towards them that they might have to family members but they are fellow human beings who have a need which can be met by the actions of these men who know that with the risks that they take on some shouts, they might not come back. This is the sort of love/compassion/sympathy/empathy which leads people to jump into rivers to save drowning strangers; it is the motivation behind folk who exchanged places with strangers in Nazi death camps and went to the gas chambers in their place. It is also the motivation which drove Lily to stand between Harry and Voldemort and it is that same motivation which drives Harry to prepare to stand up to Voldemort in PS when he thinks that Snape is getting the Stone for him. Dungrollin: > As for your last two sentences, they're not fact at all, > they're your opinion, and in relation to the RW I disagree > completely. (Imagine the big smiley that I'm too stuffy to use.) Geoff: I'm glad you didn't use a big smiley. I think I would have completely misunderstood it. BTW, only one of my sentences is labelled "in fact". My last sentence was an extrapolation of that indicating where the outcome might well lead us. I stand by what I said. If there is no sacrificial love to counterbalance as I indicated above, we finish up with the excesses of dictatorship as practised by Hitler or Stalin or currently Mugabe or in Sudan where no compassion or humanity is shown - exactly the Voldemort attitude. The world becomes one of "dog eat dog" because no one can trust anyone else and the coterie of folk round "the leader" are quite happy to climb on everybody else's faces to curry favour to reach the top of the heap and the devil take the hindmost; I suspect Lucius Malfoy drops neatly into that group as an example. Dungrollin: > Sacrifices don't have to be made with love in order for them to > make the world a better place. Small acts of kindness, compassion > and empathy are not worthless because they are done out of a sense > of obligation rather than love. Geoff: If they are done out of a sense of obligation, then they are done almost as duties. I would query whether they are really acts of kindness etc. Snape saved Harry in PS out of a sense of obligation - did he feel kindness or compassion or empathy? From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Fri Dec 3 22:54:18 2004 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 22:54:18 -0000 Subject: New characters in HBP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119191 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cat_kind" wrote: > > We have the following possible new characters in HBP: > > A) The HBP: possibly new, almost certainly a character. > > B) Felix Felicis: certainly new, possibly a character. > > C) The lion-man (described on JKR's website some time back): > certainly new and certainly a character. Hickengruendler: I am sure this is either Godric Gryffindor or someone closely related to him. I don't think it is an accident that he looks like a lion. > Possibly also: > D) Godric Griffindor: Conceivably a character, as he first came up > in Book 2, so fits the description of Possible Title for Book Two, > if more of his story had been given there. > > E) Inhabitant of Spinners End: The main theory seems to be it's a > place, so it doesn't seem too much of a stretch for it to have an > owner. Okay so this is maybe far-fetched. > > F) New teacher of DADA (or Potions if Snape gets DADA) > > Surely some of these coincide? > > D can't be C, as the lion-man wears glasses, which wouldn't have > been invented in GG's time. Hickengruendler: Quite a lot wasn't invented at that time, but that didn't stop Salazar Slytherin to hide the entrance to the Chamber Of Secrets in a modern bathroom. > B can't really be E because Felix turns up much later than Spinners > End. Hickengruendler: Umbridge was introduced in chapter 8 of OotP, yet the chapter named after her was chapter 12. Lockhart also apperaed before the chapter that was named after him. Of course, the gap wasn't nearly as big as it were, if Felic would be the owner of Spinner's End. But still, maybe he has a short cameo appereance in the beginning and chapter 12 is, where he is really introduced. > Someone > we already know (Lupin's family? Luna's family) lives at Spinners > End. Hickengruendler: To me, Spinner's End suggests a more noble house or place (although I admit, I don't really know, why. Just an impression). Therefore I associate it with the more royal-like wizarding families. If it belongs to a family we already know, than I think either to the Longbottoms or the Malfoys. From pjarrett at gmail.com Fri Dec 3 18:45:56 2004 From: pjarrett at gmail.com (Patrick Jarrett) Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 13:45:56 -0500 Subject: What's the Prince in HBP a Prince of? In-Reply-To: <20041203012803.7802.qmail@web51403.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041203012803.7802.qmail@web51403.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <3def328f04120310456eb81d18@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119192 I have a confession to make concerning the HBP... I am not really concerned with WHO is the HBP, I'm more wondering how this is going to weave into the story. And in doing so I think it will lead me to ideas about who it could be. What exactly could THE Prince be a Prince of? So far in the WW the groups identify with their country. England has a Minister at least. And the next issue arises in that all Hogwarts students are from the British isles... Yes, there is the Royal family, but with the chasm between Muggles and the WW, how would JKR work this into the story? So then, looking elsewhere, we have some characters from Bulgaria (Krum, Karkaroff?) and then the Beauxbottoms from somewhere near France? Bulgaria in the 80s was under the Soviet sphere which was not a Monarchy with lineage as a factor. And France has run off their Constitution since the 1950s and so they had a President during the time. So then, with this knowledge I began wondering again. What races have we met who might be a viable option... Hagrid is a half giant. And from what we've learned concerning the Giant culture, they do not have royalty in any sense of the word. So then I ask you all to join me in wondering just what the HBP is the Prince of? -- Patrick From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Fri Dec 3 19:04:13 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 11:04:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: Harry's Protection (was Re: Questions) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041203190413.72345.qmail@web53102.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119193 > Geoff: ...Edited... The point is, of course, that Sirius was not trying to harm Harry but was acting in self-defence. [Talking about the Shrieking Shack here] Although Harry does not realise it, Sirius is doing this to try to stop Harry's frenzied attack and protect himself. Does the protective magic have, so to speak, some innate ability to sense that the attack is not an attempt on Harry's life? Juli: But Harry wasn't at Priver Drive, we know that nobody can harm him while he's at his aunt's house, so I guess his protection doesn't work elsewhere, I mean, he's been harm many times before. Juli __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Dec 4 00:45:00 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 00:45:00 -0000 Subject: Trusting characters Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119194 Kizor wrote: > > Carol responds: > > *Snip several reasons behind Hagrid's use of his motorcycle > > --Arcum [Carol notes: Actually my whole post was snipped. The reasons weren't mine.] > Kizor again: > Fourth: We don't know if a person Apparating can bring another person who can't Apparate with him. > > Fifth: Hagrid hadn't been cleared from the whole Chamber of Secrets > business at the time, he had been expelled from Hogwarts, and his wand had been snapped. Perhaps that didn't keep him from doing magic, but try getting a license with those credentials. > Carol notes: Actually, we were talking about why *Sirius* used the motorcycle to travel to Godric's Hollow on the night the Potters were killed. Clearly *Hagrid* used it because Sirius had lent or given it to him (depending on whether you believe the story he tells in SS/PS ("Young Sirius Black lent it me") or the later version in PoA, where he states that Sirius *gave* it to him because he wouldn't be needing it again. Expecting to be put in Azkaban, maybe?). But, that aside, why would Sirius use the motorcycle rather than apparating to Godric's Hollow? (Several answers have been given upthread, but I haven't heard anything really convincing yet--other than JKR's need to have Hagrid use the motorcycle since he either can't apparate at all or can't apparate with a baby.) But I'm looking for a convincing character-based explanation for why *Sirius* used it. Someone suggested that Sirius may not know how to apparate, and I'll grant that that's possible. Maybe he thought that as an animagus, he didn't need to learn. But since he's a bit of a show-off and likes to take risks, I can't imagine him choosing not to learn (or James, either). And I would think that if you're good at Transfiguration, you'd be good at making yourself disappear and reappear. Maybe? Anyway, if Sirius can't apparate, how did he get to the tropical island (or whatever it was) where he was hiding at the beginning of GoF? And how did he get back to England? He didn't have his motorcycle (or a broom) in either case, and I doubt that he swam the English Channel, much less a larger body of water like the Mediterranean Sea, in either human or dog form. He's unlikely to have had a port key, either, and Floo Powder wouldn't work for such a long journey. So I'm guessing that he apparated to and from his hiding place and *could* have apparated to Godric's Hollow, but for some reason, chose to take the motorcycle instead. Maybe he wanted James and Lily, if they were still alive, to hear the roar of the engine and know it was him? Any more thoughts, anyone? Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Dec 4 00:54:32 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 00:54:32 -0000 Subject: The silver hand (Was: The Darkness Within) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119195 Geoff wrote: > Secondly, where does the idea come from that conjured objects are transient? There is evidence in at least two places - probably more - that objects are removed by using the spell "Evanesco". Carol responds: It comes mostly from one of JKR's interviews, where she explained that she had placed certain limits on magic, and one of them was that objects conjured out of thin air were transient. Otherwise, Harry and Hermione could have conjured up a feast for Sirius in GoF instead of taking him chicken legs from Hogwarts and the Weasleys could conjure up money to pay their expenses. But conjured money melts into thin air, as we've seen with Leprechaun gold. Which is why I raised the question about Peter's silver hand possibly suffering a similar fate. (Still wondering what other people think on that question.) Also, isn't it just spilled liquids that can be "vanished" permanently with Evanesco? Otherwise, Umbridge would probably have Evanescoed Harry's and the Weasley Twins' brooms rather than confiscating. Unfair, yes. Unethical, yes. But what would Umbridge care? Carol, who for some reason is having trouble capitalizing her own name From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Dec 4 01:07:15 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 01:07:15 -0000 Subject: Snape/Occlumency again (Was: Does Viktor Krum become an important In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119196 Carol earlier: > > > OTOH, if he [Harry] *does* need to use Occlumency in facing his most hated enemy, what better way to practice than to confront *Snape* attempting to invade his mind? I don't think Harry really "got" it before when Snape said, "You are handing me weapons." Now, surely, he would understand--and do what he was told. golden_faile responded: > > The thing that is being forgotten when dealing with Harry ( and I > hope Dumbledore gets this now) is that Harry is not used to going to > adults for help. So in order to get him to cooperate or understand, > he NEEDS to be clued in on what is going on. He is never going to > just blidly follow directions and it is going to be damn hard to > teach him that way. Snape is definitely not the one for the job > brcause he enjoys having the upper hand and will never give Harry > more information than what HE feels Harry needs to know,due to what > he sees as Harry being arrogant. Carol again: I think that a lot will have changed after OoP, and Harry is going to have to learn to be less angry and arrogant and to take Snape in stride. Moreover, if Dumbledore ordered Snape to give Harry complete information, I'm pretty sure that Snape would obey. To my knowledge, we've never seen Snape disobey a direct order, even one he doesn't like. It appears that he told Harry as much as he could about Occlumency and why it was needed in OoP. It was Dumbledore who didn't want Harry to know about the Prophecy and *why* he should stop trying to have the dream. Granted, if Harry still needs to learn Occlumency, Dumbledore could do it himself. But I think that Harry would see the danger more clearly if the person trying to access his memories through Legilimency were Snape rather than DD. And also the spell, as opposed to the more standard "mind-reading" Legilimency that DD uses allows Harry as well as Snape to see the memories being accessed. I don't think that would happen if Harry were to try to fight Dumbledore-style Legilimency. Yet another reason why Snape is really , IMO, the best man for the job--if Harry could be made to understand that. Carol From MadameSSnape at aol.com Sat Dec 4 01:12:26 2004 From: MadameSSnape at aol.com (MadameSSnape at aol.com) Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 20:12:26 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Trusting characters Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs Message-ID: <157.4540174f.2ee268fa@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119197 In a message dated 12/3/2004 7:48:08 PM Eastern Standard Time, justcarol67 at yahoo.com writes: Anyway, if Sirius can't apparate, how did he get to the tropical island (or whatever it was) where he was hiding at the beginning of GoF? And how did he get back to England? He didn't have his motorcycle (or a broom) in either case, and I doubt that he swam the English Channel, much less a larger body of water like the Mediterranean Sea, in either human or dog form. He's unlikely to have had a port key, either, and Floo Powder wouldn't work for such a long journey. ============== Sherrie here: How did he travel on the run? One word: Buckbeak. He flew off from Hogwarts on his back, & later flew back to England on him. Sherrie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat Dec 4 01:19:31 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 01:19:31 -0000 Subject: Predictions for book 6 and 7. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119198 > Now Meri: > 17: Neville is toast. He's gonna sacrifice himself to the cause and go down like a massive hero, but not before getting a new wand, shocking the entire by becoming the number two student in sixth year, showing up Snape in Potions and beating Hermione in Herbology. Alla: Sorry, Meri but I agree that Neville is the most likely unlikely candidate to be a teacher. I think that if anybody close to Harry is toast (hopefully not Harry), it won't be Neville. I wish I knew who it would be though. I do agree though that Neville will show Snape who he really is pretty soon. Meri: > 18: Ron and Hermione will finally get together on screen. Alla: I was REALLY hesitant to make a SHIP prediction, because when I say I don't care about SHIPS, I mean it (except Sirius/Snape or Sirius/Remus). I want kids to be alive and happy, but who gets together with whom, I could care less. But since you said it, I can only concur - I think the text is VERY clear in moving towards Ron/Hermione and also less clear, but clear enough towards Harry/Ginny. Meri: > 20: Dumbledore is going to die. Alla: Actually, I am NOT so sure anymore about this one.. Story logic dictates that Dumbledore is toast, very very toast, but I was almost positive that this is going to happen in OOP, instead JKR completely destroyed Dumbledore's immage as infallible mentor right in front of Harry's eyes and that was much more effective, IMO, than simply killing him. I think that Harry realises that Dumbledore cannot help him much anymore (although I would LOVE to be wrong on this one) and it almost equals to the impact his death would have had. I think that there is a small possibility that Dumbledore survives at the end if only to see that he interpreted the prophecy incorrectly. Meri: 23: Either Remus or Peter will die at the hand of the other. Alla: Please let it be Peter, please. :) Meri: > 24: Book 6 will end in a cliffhanger. At which point every HP fan > around the world will flip out and start sending Howlers to JKR. Alla: LOLOL! I actually agree that there is a possibility of cliffhanger ending. Lupinlore: > 2-1 in favor of Peter helping Harry, although with the proviso that he may not actually intend to help Harry (think Gollum at the end of LOTR) Alla: Indeed, I can see this possibility > Alla previously: 6. Harry will think that Snape betrayed the Order in HBP. Lupinlore: > 2-1 in favor of this or some similar belief by Harry about Snape. > Alla previously: 7. We will learn in book 7 that Snape did not betray the Order. Lupinlore: > Even money. I don't think Snape will consciously betray the Order. However, his dislike of Harry (and others) may lead him to do > something that is an inadvertant betrayal. Also, all these instances in all the other books of Harry suspecting Snape and being proved wrong are starting to smell suspiciously like a double- blind. It may be time for Harry to be suspicious about Snape and be right for once. Alla: It would be A LOT of fun to read for me. All Harry's suspicions will finally come true. It could be double bluff, definitely, but I'd still say that int he end Snape will tunr out to be not ESE> Kethryn's hand at predictions - 1. McGonnagall is a gonner. Probably at the end of book 6. It sucks, I know, but she is not only expendable but, tactically from Voldemort's PoV, she is an excellent choice to knock off, striking a blow at both Harry and Dumbledore. Alla: Well, either Dumbledore or McGonagall are toasted, but for the reasons above, I may actually agree with you that McGonagall could be dead. Kethryn: huge snip of agreeable predictions . > 11. Draco is forced to come to some hard choices and, under a lot of strain, he forgets to be nasty to the trio. Lucius and he are going to have to have a show down if Draco is ever going to develope into something other than a nasty little git. I am betting, too, that we will be seeing more of Narcissa (or at least get some of the story there) in 6. Alla: I disagree. Not because I don't want Draco to become more than 2-D character, but because I think that JKR gave up on his development. Although "Draco's detour" gives me a little bit of hope. Not much though. There is not much space left to write credible story of Draco's redemption, IMO. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Dec 4 01:21:15 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 01:21:15 -0000 Subject: Another Flint? (Was: When?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119199 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "kjirstem" wrote: > > > > > Carol: > > > The fact that Colin was one of the basilisk's victims also seems to > > confirm that he really is Muggle-born. > > kjirstem: > > I thought the basilisk in COS was being directed by Possessed!Ginny, > not selecting its targets independently. (COS, Ch 17, in Tom Riddle's > gloating to Harry.) In FBAWTFT the entry for Basilisk indicates that > they are dangerous to anyone except a Parselmouth, so it isn't that > they somehow sense Muggle-borns. Colin was attacked because he was > thought to be Muggle-born; the attack isn't proof that he actually is > Muggle-born. Carol notes: I suppose we could go with the unreliable narrator idea again. We're *told* that the victims are all Muggleborns; everyone from Tom Riddle to Dumbledore seems to refer to them as Muggleborns; but there's no solid evidence of their parentage. Still, we know that Hermione really is a Muggleborn, and she was one of the victims. And Tom himself says that the whole reason for having the basilisk was to kill Muggleborns, and I think he would have wanted to be pretty sure of his victims--something besides the knowledge little Ginny gave him in the diary, though as a pureblood, she probably did at least know who the pureblood families weres. At any rate, we haven't heard another word about the basilisk's victims, no indication that the basilisk somehow got it wrong. IMO, we can safely assume that the Creeveys *are* Muggleborn (note that Colin didn't know about wizard photographs or how to develop them and used an old-fashioned Muggle camera that must have been his grandfather's). What point would there be in rewriting the story now to give them a different heritage? I don't think we need an explanation for their size other than Dennis's age and their genetic inheritance from, say, a very short Muggle mother. Carol, who has already explained why she doesn't think they're part house-elf, much less part goblin From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Sat Dec 4 01:24:13 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 01:24:13 -0000 Subject: Harry's Protection (was Re: Questions) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119200 Kneasy: > See, I know that lots of fans think or hope that 'love' is the > answer. I'm one of those that hopes otherwise - it's too > Disneyfied for my taste. > > JKR has gone on record saying she admires courage and that one of > the main themes of the tale is death. Taking these into account I > offered the suggestion last year that the power would be some > variant on Life, Life Force overcoming all obstacles - or > something similar. It fits with what DD says about the locked > room. > > Consider the Dept. of Mysteries and the rooms the kids go through. > Compare these with what DD has to say about what isn't in the > Locked Room: > "More wonderful and more terrible than Death (the Death Chamber), > than human intelligence (the brain tank), than the forces of nature > (the planetary system)." > Throw in the paradoxes of Time as another make-weight mystery. > > And when you recall that Voldy is about death (Death Eaters) and > by attempting immortality is trying to circumvent natural life as > we know it - well, I think I'm in with a fighting chance of being > right. SSSusan: I'm rather surprised there has been no response to this yet onlist, for it really is a fascinating view. Yes, I've spouted off about Sacrificial Love, and I still think I've got a chance to be right on that, but this is nice how you've incorporated some of the other rooms in the DoM, as well as Voldy being opposite Life with his *Death* eaters. My one question, thoughL: Why would Life or Life Force be more wonderful nd **terrible** than death? Siriusly Snapey Susan From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Dec 4 01:40:32 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 01:40:32 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119201 Siriusly Snapey Susan wrote: > I'm not arguing that James didn't > have a personal dislike of Snape -- the "because he exists" remark > does show that -- but I don't see how/why we should assume that some > of that dislike didn't have something to do w/ Snape's interest in > the Dark Arts. It's what James' friends believed to be true; why > doubt that it was at least a component of it?; why assume Sirius was > projecting? I just don't see that as necessary to a belief that > James hated Snape *and* hated the Dark Arts. > > Carol responds: You could be right. However, I see a huge difference between Pensieve James and Godric's Hollow James, and I think something very important happened to get him to stop being an arrogant show-off and turn into a brave and principled Order member. Maybe the so-called Prank shaped him up a bit; maybe Lily's influence helped as well aand being a father helped as well, but I don't think they're sufficient to explain the transformation. He clearly isn't taking life or exams or the threat of the Dark Arts seriously in the Pensieve scene, as witnessed by his joking remarks about the werewolf question. He isn't even taking the duel with Severus seriously, at least until Severus insults Lily and he apparently wants to pay him back. But he's still an arrogant little berk at the end of the scene. He doesn't understand why Lily objects to his conduct. I still think something terrible, quite possibly the murder of his parents, completed the transformation from irresponsible boy to responsible adult. As for Sirius projecting his own hatred of the Dark Arts onto James, he, unlike James at this point, has reasons for hating Dark Wizards. He lives with them in that horrible house. He knows, as James probably does not, exactly what the Dark Arts involve. James seems to dislike Severus, for reasons that aren't fully clear even to him (or he'd have come up with a better answer than "because he exists"). Sirius, in contrast, clearly *hates* Severus, who seems to be the kind of boy his own parents would have wished *him* to be. The only way I can explain that difference in attitude is by speculating that Sirius thought James's rather automatic dislike of the Dark Arts (presumably picked up from his parents) was as intense and bitter as his own *hatred* of the Dark Arts. I'm not criticizing either of them (though I don't think their conduct in the Pensieve scene can be justified). I'm trying to account for what seem to be clear differences in the *intensity* of their feelings toward Severus (and to the Dark Arts, if that indeed is what Severus represents in their adolescent view). I don't think that James, for all his faults, is *vicious* in the Pensieve scene, but Sirius clearly *is*. and it's for *his* amusement that James baits Severus in the first place. Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Dec 4 02:03:27 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 02:03:27 -0000 Subject: The Darkness Within In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119202 Carol earlier: > > I have a problem here--not with azrionas's argument, which I agree with, but with the idea that Voldy is now mortal. He himself has said that he will settle, temporarily, for having his body back and not yet > > seek immortality, but if he's mortal, why can only Harry destroy him? > > > > We've already discussed why DD didn't try to kill LV at the MoM, but if LV is mortal, *couldn't* DD have killed him, Prophecy or no Prophecy? > > > > Either A) the Prophecy is wrong (or being wrongly interpreted by DD, Harry, and most readers) or B) LV is wrong about his own mortality: he's immortal with the exception of an Achilles heel named Harry Potter. > > > > Can anyone think of a third possibility (C)) that will make sense of > > this apparent contradiction? How can Voldy be mortal and still be > > killable only by Harry? > Neri responded: >Briefly, I suggest that LV agreed to become mortal again only if he'd also gain Harry's protection. With the blood trick he indeed managed to get this protection for himself, but by sharing blood with Harry, he is now vulnerable to Harry, exactly in the same way that Harry is vulnerable to him. So LV is now mortal, but protected against everybody except Harry. This explains DD's gleam of triumph: he realized that LV again made the prophecy come true by his own actions. This also explains why DD didn't try to kill LV in the MoM ? he believes that LV is protected against anybody except Harry. Carol again: But LV states specifically that he's mortal. He also seems to think that Dumbledore could have killed him in the MoM (whether he could have or not, I don't know, but I don't think he could have). So I don't think that Voldemort is deliberately making himself killable only by Harry, whether that's the effect of the "blood trick" or not. For one thing, he still doesn't know the details of the Prophecy, either at this time or later. But he does know enough to suspect that Harry is "the one with the power," and it makes no sense at all (to me) that he would deliberately make himself vulnerable to the one person who can kill or destroy him. Also, as I read the GoF scene, the first step is to get his body back; the next step is to pursue immortality *again* by taking whatever steps he took before to become sufficiently immortal to survive an AK. Maybe nightly mini-doses of Nagini venom or something? Carol, who thinks she understands how he became "immortal" in the first place but is confused because he seems to think he has lost that power (despite having survived the AK) and openly admits as much to the DEs. And yet it was never his *body* that was immortal in the first place. It's his *spirit* that survived. If he's mortal, can't a renegade DE kill him? And why trust his untrustworthy disciples with that knowledge? The only thing I can think of is that a DE or Dumbledore (if he'd lower himself to use an AK) could destroy Voldemort's current body, just as the first one was destroyed, but only Harry can permanently vanquish and destroy his spirit? If so, I don't think *Voldemort* knows this, but Dumbledore might. Which would certainly answer the question JKR asked her fans about why Dumbledore didn't try to kill Voldemort at the MoM. (There are other answers, too, including the one he gave Voldemort, but maybe this is the one JKR herself was looking for.) Carol, who did go back and review Neri's elaborate theory, but thinks that a simpler answer is needed here From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat Dec 4 02:11:08 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 02:11:08 -0000 Subject: Snape/Occlumency again (Was: Does Viktor Krum become an important In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119203 > Carol again: > I think that a lot will have changed after OoP, and Harry is going to have to learn to be less angry and arrogant and to take Snape in stride. Moreover, if Dumbledore ordered Snape to give Harry complete information, I'm pretty sure that Snape would obey. To my knowledge, we've never seen Snape disobey a direct order, even one he doesn't like. It appears that he told Harry as much as he could about > Occlumency and why it was needed in OoP. It was Dumbledore who didn't want Harry to know about the Prophecy and *why* he should stop trying to have the dream. Alla: Dumbledore is very much at fault here, but for all his faults, it seems to me that his intentions towards Harry are good, which I cannot say about Snape yet. That is why I vote for Dumbledore having enough common sense to keep Harry and Snape apart at least till Harry overcomes his grief. As to Harry being less angry and arrogant.... well,as soon as Snape manages to stop being "semi-hysterical hypocritical sadist" (I decided this nickname by Lupinlore is much better than simply sadist), I am sure Harry will learn to do that. Before Susan will say something about Snape's impossibility to change, I will concede that I believe that Harry will change regardless, but I still can dream that Snape change, can I? From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat Dec 4 02:23:28 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 02:23:28 -0000 Subject: Snape and Lupin's Character Arcs (was: Lupin's Char Arc) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119204 > Alla wrote: I am sure you know my position by now - I don't believe he is ESE as in Voldemort's cervant,but I also don't believe that he is a good guy. Good guys don't do to human beings half of his size what he does to Harry and Neville, IMO.< > now boyd: Howdy, Alla! Agreed that Snape isn't a nice guy, but I think we also both agree that he seems to be on the same side as Harry in this war. Yet why not damn DD, too? After all, his actions have been far worse for Harry than Snape's mere words! (stuck him at the Dursleys, tells him almost nothing, doesn't protect him much of the time, doesn't act like a father despite being Harry's only father figure) Alla: I just posted about Dumbledore being very much at fault, so I absolutely agree with you, but since I am not a conspiracy theorist, I believe that Dumbledore is a good man making very difficult choices to ensure Harry's survival. In short, when JKR says "epithome of goodness", I believe her and I don't believe in Puppetmaster!Dumbledore What does it translates to for me? In the idea, that Dumbledore indeed loves Harry and although he is a general fighting a war, he is also concerned with Harry's survival and even happiness. I believe that words have tremendous power. I believe that JKR showed very well what words can do in the second book. Riddle!Diary were mere words, but look what they did to Ginny. By the way, I did not say that Snape was not a nice guy. You can be not nice, but a good person. I don't believe that Snape is a GOOD guy. I believe that he is a bad person, fighting on the side of good. That is why I think he will redeem himself att he end (as if he did not redeem himself yet). Boyd: And given that list of possible emotional supporters, who needs Lupin anymore? Just seeing him become less distant isn't enough of a payoff to keep him around, IMO. Something must come of Tonks the metamorph--else why waste the words on her--and Luna seems to have jumped off the pages yet remains a mystery, and there's Ginny's continuing development. Basically, that crew all clearly has developing left to do, whereas I fear Remus to be a character completed. Alla: Sorry, disagree. I think plenty could be done with Remus character yet. He still carries some secrets (you know, those missing twelve years, how did he know that veil is deadly, etc.). Him slowly changing over being in tighter relationship with Harry - I would love to see that. From stonehenge.orders at verizon.net Sat Dec 4 02:24:53 2004 From: stonehenge.orders at verizon.net (kjirstem) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 02:24:53 -0000 Subject: Hogwarts letters Re: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119205 > > kjirstem wrote earlier: > > There is some indication that at least the Prime Minister knows >about the WW (isn't there? I could have sworn there was but I can't >find it now...) > > Kim now: > I think you're right. I remember something like that. Is it in >OotP or PoA? kjirstem: Found it (PoA Ch 3), article in the Daily Prophet quoting Fudge, "... I have the Prime Minister's assurance that he will not breathe a word of Black's true identity to anyone. And let's face it - who'd believe him if he did?" > Kim earlier: > Yikes! Hopefully they would just fall through the cracks like so > many folks do out here in the real world, for better or worse. For > Muggleborns evading the MW administration, it would be for the > better, IMO. > > kjirstem earlier: > I wonder how they deal with taxes. I'd assume the WW pays > for the Ministry of Magic, etc, but you'd think someone in the MW > would get suspicious of Muggle-borns when they don't pay taxes. I > guess those Muggles never notice nuffink. > > The thing that bugs me a little about all the Muggle-borns falling > through the cracks of the RW is that it corresponds pretty well with > Vernon Dursley's view of the WW. It means he's basically right - >that wizarding folk aren't fine, upstanding members of society (at >least as he knows it) - I think that would have to be true for them >not to be noticed. I hate the thought that he might have some basis >for that conclusion. > > Kim: > Well, unless the Muggleborns make a substantial drain on the public > welfare, maybe they don't really owe any taxes. I think if they > stick to living most of their lives in the WW, asking them to pay > taxes in the MW would be kind of unfair. If they felt guilty >though, they could always drop a galleon or two in some likely place >-- can't see a Muggle turning away pure gold no matter what form it >came in (of course now I can't remember if galleons even are pure >gold...) kjirstem: I didn't mean to suggest that they should pay taxes in both the WW and MW. Ooof, I know I'd hate that. I just meant that there is no evidence to Muggles of what wizarding folk do, so it probably looks like they are falling through the cracks in the RW. And, if you think they actually are falling through the cracks then that perception is correct, in a way. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Dec 4 02:32:40 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 02:32:40 -0000 Subject: Slytherin House again. Was: Re: Problem with OotP? (was: Pampering) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119206 Alla wrote: > There should be a reason why the House with racist ideology exists > for 1000 years. Carol responds: I think the reason is simply that the WW doesn't have the same values that modern Muggles do. They seem to be caught in a time warp, with a general acceptance of values that seem bigoted to our eyes but would not have seemed so in, say, the nineteenth century or earlier. Many, though by no means all, white Americans and Europeans used to think that nonwhites were inferior, just as most wizards, including good people like the Weasleys, think that Muggles are inferior and nonhumans even more so. Hermione, with her house-elf crusade, seems to be the lone voice in the WW for equality for nonhumans. We have the anti-werewolf legislation (which does at least have some basis in that uncontrolled werewolves could do great damage), we have the prejudice against giants (which again has some basis in fact; they really are dangerous), etc. these views seem to be taken for granted in the WW. The pureblood prejudice of the Slytherins is less widespread, but still common. Even Fudge, who doesn't strike me as a Slytherin type, seems to share it. I imagine that the Crouches did, too, though again I don't think Barty Sr. was a Slytherin. (I don't know what to make of Barty Jr. before the DEs corrupted him, but he could have been a fallen Ravenclaw.) At any rate, note that they are still (or were still) a pureblood family, meaning that they had not intermarried with Muggleborns and halfbloods, at least not for a very long time. And Ernie Macmillan, a Hufflepuff, boasts of his nine generations of pureblood ancestors. So quite simply, what we consider to be a "racist" house has existed for 1,000 years because it reflects the standards and values of many inhabitants of the WW. They don't see themselves with our eyes. And as I said in another post, pure blood and pureblood values are not the only considerations in placing a student in Slytherin. The Sorting Hat mentioned ambition and cunning long before it mentioned pure blood as one of Salazar Slytherin's original considerations. *If* students are to be sorted according to their interests, values, and family traditions, then there's as much need for Slytherin as there is for the other houses. (It might have been better, for that matter, to keep Sirius, with his reckless daring that passed for courage, out of Gryffindor. And how are brainy, nerdy Ravenclaws (Cho *not* being a typical member of that house, I'm sure) supposed to learn social skills if they're stuck with other bookish types like themselves?) So I agree that the house system is in itself probably a bad idea, at least if it uses the latent personality traits of eleven-year-olds to sort them. But I'm not surprised at all that Slytherin House has existed for 1,000 years and that no one, including Dumbledore himself, appears to have raised any objections to its existence. And even the Sorting Hat itself is only protesting having to "quarter" the students every year, not having to place one-quarter of them in Slytherin. Carol From barbfulton at yahoo.com Fri Dec 3 19:58:08 2004 From: barbfulton at yahoo.com (Barb Fulton) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 19:58:08 -0000 Subject: Reintegrating to MW / jobs after Hogwarts (was Re: Hogwarts letters) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119207 Barb says first: I have only posted to this list once, so my snipping may be substandard. I apologize in advance for poor snipping, for leaving some posts out entirely, or for if I accidentally attribute a comment to the wrong person. > > Finwitch: > > I know what they could be: Magicians. > > And for the rest, well... A chemist? (not so different from > > Potions or Alchemy, actually Chemistry developed from Alchemy). > > An astronomer? (They DO teach astronomy at Hogwarts!) > > 'Pseudo'-meedio, with the help of Divination? > > And nothing to keep you from writing fantasy stories about WW, > > is there? > Dungrollin: > > A Muggle university education may well be out for Hogwarts grads, > but come off it! Lacking a university education does not mean you > have no place in society! Honestly... > kjirstem: > But, it is one thing to be able to do a job and another thing to > get paid to do a job. Many of the jobs listed in the posts above > have some entrance requirements that might be pretty difficult to > get around coming out of Hogwarts. Probably the best bet would be > a job with a family member, nepotism can overcome a lot of missing > background. snipped the rest of kjirstems' post and some other entire posts > Del: > (snip) the Muggleborns might not be cut off from their Muggle > *family*, but they do end up being cut off from the Muggle *world*. > Hermione still sees her parents, and we can reasonably assume > she'll keep on visiting them every now and then when she grows up, > but that's about it. No Muggle friends, no Muggle activities, no > Muggle whatever. (snip) > But they are no more *a part* of the Muggle World. They've > emigrated to the WW, and they've left the MW behind. No matter how > often they go back there, they are now citizens of the WW. (snip) Barb now: I've read all of the posts in this thread (I think), and I still don't understand why a Muggle-born witch or wizard has to cut themselves off. We know of witches who live quite convincingly in the Muggle World (Dean's mom, TMR's mom). Here are my theories... 1) Does England have a GED? (For anyone who isn't familiar, a GED is a high school equivalency in the US.) I don't know if a GED is enough to get into college, but it is for tech school at least. My sister's ex-husband was a high school dropout, but he got his GED and went on to tech school to become a nursing assistant. Sure, Hogwarts students missed 7 years of muggle school, but they are only 17 when they leave Hogwarts-they can certainly devote a year (or a few) to reintegrating themselves. Certainly their parents would be willing to help them, and there are always tutors. Home-schooled students don't have diplomas, either, if I'm not mistaken. 2) We don't know if Hogwarts has a plan for students who wish to return to the Muggle World full-time. We don't learn of new classes until they come up in Harry's world. Maybe there's a NEWT alternative in 7th year- "So You Want to be a Muggle" coursework that would result in a diploma from a not-well-known boarding school. A 7th year planning to return to the MW would have no reason to achieve NEWTs, so they could devote their entire year to "muggle integration." After my sister woke up from a 4 month coma, she had no recollection of how money worked, how to write a check, buy groceries, etc. She learned all of that in therapy, so a person can absolutely be taught how society works and how to function in it. My sister is now a very productive member of society, holds a job, volunteers at her children's schools, etc. 3) A student's HoH or DD could refer them to a wizard living in the MW who could act as a resource, at least. Maybe a wizard acting as a Muggle Life Coach? It's not as if nothing in the Hogwarts curriculum can help them in the MW, after all. Hogwarts students must be good readers, write a ton of essays, and as Finwitch said, they do study Potions (chemistry, plus measuring ingredients would require at least some math) and Astronomy. Isn't Arithmancy a form of math? And the background in Latin could definitely help in learning other languages. I like the idea of a former Hogwarts student writing a novel (or series) about a fantastic world, maybe including a magical school where kids play sports on broomsticks? Just my thoughts. Be gentle-I'm still new to posting! -Barb From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Sat Dec 4 02:01:03 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 18:01:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: PM knows about WW (Hogwarts letters Re: Choosing sides) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041204020103.32017.qmail@web53103.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119208 > kjirstem wrote: > There is some indication that at least the Prime > Minister knows about the WW (isn't there? I could > have sworn there was but I can't find it now...) > > Kim now: > I think you're right. I remember something like > that. Is it in OotP or PoA? Juli Answers: it's in PoA, when Harry takes the Knight Bus to Diagon Alley, Stan hands him the news paper, there on the first page is Sirius and a comment by Cornelius Fudge, something like this "I've notified the muggle Prime Minister, I've told him he's dangerous, he promised he wouldn't tell he was a wizard, he'll tell muggles he's got a gun" Juli From dontask2much at yahoo.com Sat Dec 4 02:43:36 2004 From: dontask2much at yahoo.com (charme) Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 21:43:36 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Another Flint? (Was: When?) References: Message-ID: <013c01c4d9ab$0e43dce0$6701a8c0@MITRE.ORG> No: HPFGUIDX 119209 "kjirstem wrote: >> >> >> >> > Carol: >> >> > The fact that Colin was one of the basilisk's victims also seems to >> > confirm that he really is Muggle-born. >> >> kjirstem: >> >> I thought the basilisk in COS was being directed by Possessed!Ginny, >> not selecting its targets independently. (COS, Ch 17, in Tom Riddle's >> gloating to Harry.) In FBAWTFT the entry for Basilisk indicates that >> they are dangerous to anyone except a Parselmouth, so it isn't that >> they somehow sense Muggle-borns. Colin was attacked because he was >> thought to be Muggle-born; the attack isn't proof that he actually is >> Muggle-born. > > Carol notes: > I suppose we could go with the unreliable narrator idea again. We're > *told* that the victims are all Muggleborns; everyone from Tom Riddle > to Dumbledore seems to refer to them as Muggleborns; but there's no > solid evidence of their parentage. Still, we know that Hermione really > is a Muggleborn, and she was one of the victims. And Tom himself says > that the whole reason for having the basilisk was to kill Muggleborns, > and I think he would have wanted to be pretty sure of his > victims--something besides the knowledge little Ginny gave him in the > diary, though as a pureblood, she probably did at least know who the > pureblood families weres. charme: How about we visit the unreliable Tom/LV narrative again? We've already been informed once from JKR that LV lied about Hagrid having werewolf cubs under his bed, and then its canon Tom framed Hagrid for Myrtle's death. Tom/LV *lies.* IMO, Tom/LV has a problem with half bloods too, not to mention purebloods who are "Muggle lovers." He's already displayed would gladly kill DD, Harry, and just about anyone who gets in his way or doesn't believe as he does whom he can't control or manipulate, regardless of their genealogy. Perhaps there's something to kjirstem's thoughts if you think of it that way? >Carol: > At any rate, we haven't heard another word about the basilisk's > victims, no indication that the basilisk somehow got it wrong. IMO, we > can safely assume that the Creeveys *are* Muggleborn (note that Colin > didn't know about wizard photographs or how to develop them and used > an old-fashioned Muggle camera that must have been his grandfather's). charme again, Maybe you're right and then again maybe there's a question here. Specifically, JKR has addressed the Colin and the camera issue in her responses to the Lexicon "open letter." "SO... as Colin's batteries can't work in Hogwarts, clearly his camera is running off the magical atmosphere and he is then developing his photographs in the magical potion that causes the figures therein to move. All of which goes to show that Colin has a lot more initiative than I ever realised." >Carol: > What point would there be in rewriting the story now to give them a > different heritage? I don't think we need an explanation for their > size other than Dennis's age and their genetic inheritance from, say, > a very short Muggle mother. charme: If you'd be so kind, please explain what you mean by this paragraph? Who is rewriting the story to give them a different heritage? There might be more to the Creevy's heritage which hasn't yet been revealed, and why wouldn't we need to see it if it's part of the story plot? JKR refers to the Creevey's size quite a bit, the same as Hagrid (who we now know is half giant) as well as other particulars about other characters (Luna and her "eyes", Harry's scar, Snape's greasy hair, Madame Maxime's size etc) which may also reveal more about their history and genealogy. Why is theorizing or discussing this any different? From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Dec 4 03:04:14 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 03:04:14 -0000 Subject: Another Flint? (Was: When?) In-Reply-To: <013301c4d820$0a2ef860$6701a8c0@MITRE.ORG> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119210 charme wrote: > While I can understand your point, Carol, I've a huge interest in genetics and genealogy - and I don't think we've heard the last of what constitutes Muggle parentage. For example, canon in both CoS and OoP refers to the concepts of half-blood, pureblood, creature (like elves and goblins) and Muggle, yet to my warped way of thinking the only clearly defined definitions of that list are the first three. For example, what if 2 Squibs marry and generations pass with no wizard children? Do they become Muggle at some point after moving away from the wizarding world thru the generations and lo and behold, a wizard child is born to 2 seemingly Muggle parents? Carol responds: Well, JKR has said in an interview that Squibs are the nonmagical children of magical parents and Muggleborns are the magical children of nonmagical parents, mirror images, in other words. And Muggles are nonmagical people who aren't Squibs. So if two Squibs (both nonmagical) have a nonmagical child, he or she would be a Muggle. And yet he or she would have wizard blood (or genes) that could show up in a later generation, resulting in a Muggleborn witch or wizard. And of course if they have a magical child, he or she will be a witch or wizard, but not a Muggleborn because the Squibs, though not magical themselves, have wizard blood on one or both sides. I'm thoroughly confused as to what the child of a halfblood and a Muggleborn would be called, but the child of two halfbloods would probably be another halfblood. And it's unclear whether Muggle "contamination" can ever be removed from the bloodline. Surely even the Malfoys and the Blacks have some Muggle in them somewhere? It's all very confusing and JKR's website isn't much help. charme again: > Having been exposed to the US Holocaust Memorial Musuem as I have (it's in my proximity) and seen/read how bloodline purity was defined, I don't know that part wizard, elf, giant or goblin blood being introduced by some means in a family genealogy can be completely eliminated. Carol again: I don't think that nonhuman blood fits into the equation here. The person involved becomes (pardon the language) a half*breed* in the eyes of the purebloods rather than a half*blood.* There's a completely different form of prejudice here, one that doesn't occur for us in our world because different species can't interbreed as they do in the WW. I very much doubt that a wizard with (known) giant or goblin ancestors could ever regain pureblood status, but that wouldn't make him a Muggleborn. Giants, elfs, goblins, etc. are magical creatures. The stigma against them is that they're *nonhuman*. Muggles, in contrast, are human (I think even Draco Malfoy would concede that, though I could be wrong). The stigma against them is that they're *not magical*. So I very much doubt that someone like Hagrid, the child of two magical beings, one of whom was nonhuman, would be referred to as a Muggleborn, any more than Grawp would be called by that term. There are no Muggles involved. So if the Creeveys were the highly unlikely product of a marriage between a house-elf and a Muggle, they would be "halfbreeds" in the sense that one parent was human and one was a nonhuman magical being, and half*bloods* in the sense that one parent was magical and the other wasn't. In any case, they would not be Muggleborns because only one parent was a Muggle. The other, though nonhuman, would be magical. But as I said in another post, it's most unlikely that a house-elf would enter the Muggle world under any circumstances and more unlikely still that she (or he) would marry a Muggle. Nor is there any trace of house-elf ancestry in the appearance and behavior of the Creevey brothers. The genes for shortness exist in the Muggle population and that, IMO, is where they came from. I'm virtually certain that no witch or wizard born in the WW, including Ginny Weasley, would mistake the child of a wizard and a house-elf for a Muggleborn. Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Dec 4 03:10:30 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 03:10:30 -0000 Subject: Duffers (was:Slytherin House again) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119211 Potioncat signed off with: > Potioncat who would never make it in either Gryffindor or Slytherin > and would like to be in Ravenclaw but would fit very well in > Hufflepuff and BTW, what is a duffer? Carol responds: Someone who duffs? Seriously, in American English, it means a really bad golfer and consequently a clumsy or inept person. I'm not sure whether that's the British meaning or not, but I'm sure I'll be corrected if it isn't. Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Dec 4 03:42:53 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 03:42:53 -0000 Subject: Another Flint? (Was: When?) In-Reply-To: <013c01c4d9ab$0e43dce0$6701a8c0@MITRE.ORG> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119212 charme wrote: Carol earlier: > > What point would there be in rewriting the story now to give them a different heritage? I don't think we need an explanation for their size other than Dennis's age and their genetic inheritance from, say, a very short Muggle mother. > > charme: > > If you'd be so kind, please explain what you mean by this paragraph? Who is rewriting the story to give them a different heritage? There might be more to the Creevy's heritage which hasn't yet been revealed, and why wouldn't we need to see it if it's part of the story plot? JKR refers to the Creevey's size quite a bit, the same as Hagrid (who we now know is half giant) as well as other particulars about other characters (Luna and her "eyes", Harry's scar, Snape's greasy hair, Madame Maxime's size etc) which may also reveal more about their history and genealogy. Why is theorizing or discussing this any different? Carol again: First my apologies for being unclear. I certainly didn't mean that *you* were rewriting the story, and I'd be the last person to criticize theorizing or speculation on any point (though I confess there are topics I avoid because I find them a bit too speculative for my taste). I meant that JKR, via her narrator and the various characters, established Colin creevey and the other victims of the basilisk as Muggleborns in CoS. *She* would have to rewrite the story to give them a different heritage if she thought it was important to do so, but she'd have to go to a lot of trouble to explain how the basilisk and Tom (or Ginny) got it wrong. I agree that a lot of attention has been focused on Dennis Creevey's size (not to mention that he established in my mind, at least, that the Giant Squid is a "good guy"), and I'm sure we'll see more of both Creevey brothers. I'm also sure that Dennis Creevey's size will play a fairly important role. (We'll also see more of Dean Thomas's skill with calligraphy and drawing; otherwise, why establish it in the narrative?) But, IMO, there's no need to change what we've been told about their heritage to do so. After all, we've yet to be told why Flitwick and Dedalus Diggle are tiny. Maybe, like Hagrid, Professor Flitwick will be revealed to have a nonhuman parent. But the Creeveys have been established as Muggleborns, and I think it would be more trouble than it's worth *to JKR* to explain how not only the Creeveys themselves but Ginny and Tom and apparently McGonagall and Dumbledore were wrong about victims being Muggleborns. Carol, who also wonders about Luna's eyes and thinks she might be related to Ollivander (which wouldn't require undoing a previously established heritage) From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Sat Dec 4 03:57:41 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 03:57:41 -0000 Subject: Knowing it was Snape (was: What has Snape seen) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119213 Carol: > The only difference between the Pensieve memories and those > conjured by the Legilimency spell appears to be that one is > fleeting and visual only; the other is substantial, involves at > least three senses, and can be entered. But neither is a > memory as you and I normally experience them. These are memories > that a Legilimens like Voldemort or Dumbledore could see, and in > which he would recognize at least one person--Snape or Harry. Even > the memory of young Tom Riddle preserved in the diary operates on > the same principle. The person whose memory it is is present in > all the memories and visible to the outsider who views them, > regardless of whether the means of viewing is the diary, some form > of Legilimency, or the Pensieve. SSSusan: Except for the *one* memory Potioncat reminded us of: Harry's memory of Hermione in the hospital wing, covered in cat fur. Harry is nowhere to be seen in that snippet. What does that mean for this theory? Siriusly Snapey Susan, who, again, acknowledges the likelihood that this is Snape in the shootin' flies & cowering scenes, but.... From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Sat Dec 4 04:11:04 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 04:11:04 -0000 Subject: Snape/Occlumency again (Was: Does Viktor Krum become an important In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119214 Carol again: > > I think that a lot will have changed after OoP, and Harry is > going to have to learn to be less angry and arrogant and to take > Snape in stride. Alla: > Dumbledore is very much at fault here, but for all his faults, it > seems to me that his intentions towards Harry are good, which I > cannot say about Snape yet. > > That is why I vote for Dumbledore having enough common sense to > keep Harry and Snape apart at least till Harry overcomes his grief. > > As to Harry being less angry and arrogant.... well,as soon as > Snape manages to stop being "semi-hysterical hypocritical sadist" > (I decided this nickname by Lupinlore is much better than simply > sadist), I am sure Harry will learn to do that. > > Before Susan will say something about Snape's impossibility to > change, I will concede that I believe that Harry will change > regardless, but I still can dream that Snape change, can I? SSSusan: You rang? :-) For once I find that Carol & I are actually in agreement! ;-) I wouldn't call it *impossible* for Snape to change. I would call it not especially likely after the pensieve fiasco. BUT I don't know about the wisdom of keeping Harry & Snape apart. I rather think they shouldn't avoid one another totally -- at least not for long. Why? Because I think DD *is* toast and I think that some reason will present itself why Harry & Snape DO have to work together. [Which is where I insert my oh-so-not-popular theory that Harry will act the "man" and grit his teeth and work w/ *Professor* Snape even if Snape remains a prick.] Siriusly Snapey Susan From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat Dec 4 04:21:48 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 04:21:48 -0000 Subject: Snape/Occlumency again (Was: Does Viktor Krum become an important In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119215 > SSSusan: > You rang? :-) Alla: Of course. :o) SSSusan: > I wouldn't call it *impossible* for Snape to change. I would call > it not especially likely after the pensieve fiasco. BUT I don't > know about the wisdom of keeping Harry & Snape apart. I rather > think they shouldn't avoid one another totally -- at least not for > long. Alla: I don't want them to be apart permanently, where will be the fun in it, but definitely till Harry is more emotionally stable to handle Snape. SSSusan: snip. [Which is where I insert my oh-so-not-popular theory that Harry will act the "man" and grit his teeth and work w/ *Professor* Snape even if Snape remains a prick.] Alla: Yes, Susan, your theories are always popular in my mind, but I hope that events will turn out in a little bit different direction. :o) From Vivamus at TaprootTech.com Sat Dec 4 04:34:28 2004 From: Vivamus at TaprootTech.com (Vivamus) Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 23:34:28 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Predictions for book 6 and 7. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200412032335458.SM01064@devbox> No: HPFGUIDX 119216 > Hickengruendler adds: > > 25. Neville is not toast and will be the classmate who > becomes a teacher, either in Herbology or in DA. Vivamus: GREAT idea, and it would fit him. Unless he IS the HBP (and I think he is the best candidate for it of the ones we've seen,) his story is too painful not to find resolution. I would add to this, though 34. Neville will use his expertise in herbology to cure his parents. > 26. Ginny, however, will die during the climax of book 7. At > this time, she's Harry's girlfriend. Vivamus: Ahhh, no, no, no! I'll go for this one, instead: 35. Harry is completely unable to throw off his tie to LV through his scar. It is too deeply a part of him for Occlumency to combat. Ginny, however, as the only other one into whom LV has poured part of himself, is able to reach and connect and complete Harry in such a way that he is able to be free from the scar's influence. ONE of the ways JKR could do this is to have Ginny pay with her life for the severing of that tie between Harry and LV. > 27. Sybill Trelawney will make a third prophecy. They always > come in threes. But it won't be in book 6, but in book 7. Vivamus: Shades of Rama, but I'll bet you are right. THe bigger question, of course, is what the prophecy would be about. > 28. Dumbledore will die at the end of book 6 and McGonagall > will become the new headmistress. Vivamus: I'm afraid this makes too much sense, as much as I like DD. > 29. Moaning Myrtle will find out that it was Voldemort who > killed her and seek revenge. Therefore the ghosts from > Voldemorts past literally came back to haunt him. Vivamus: Aha! What if MM was forced to come back to Hogwarts for precisely that reason? She was forced to leave her "friend" alone, but why send her back to Hogwarts? Why not just keep her away from her old classmate? Sure, the bathroom was where she died, but what if this is the "clue" in CoS that was pointing towards HBP? What if having a ghost around who was killed by LV creates certain vulnerabilities for LV? Oooooh, there are so many ways JKR could play with that, but what a delicious idea! > 31. Percy will be too ashamed to go back to his family, but > he will begin to work against Voldemort. Percy will not die > but instead will have to live with the mistakes he had made. Vivamus: Have to disagree with this one. I think Percy will in fact die for his errors, though I hope he honors his family by first owning up to what a snotty little sycophant he has been, and then by standing up heroically to accomplish something significant, dying in the process. > 32. Snape however will die, in the final battle (which I > agree will take place at Hogwarts), saving Harry. Vivamus: Hmmm, have to give that one a maybe, as JKR could sure make it work, and work well. I guess I like leaving Snape alive after finally saving Harry's life in HBP, because then they both would have to deal with their feelings in book 7. With DD gone, and Snape no longer owing Harry's family a life-debt, but Harry in fact owing him one, what happens to their relationship? Don't the possibilities shout? Great ideas. Vivamus From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Dec 4 04:55:17 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 04:55:17 -0000 Subject: Tonks' clumsiness In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119217 Kizor wrote: > > PS. Completely useless fact: I just realized that "Alastor" is one > letter away from the Finnish word for "naked". Given JKR's love for > word-play, this is quite unfortunate for Finnish readers. Carol responds, with apologies for snipping the post itself: "Alastor" is also the title of a poetic allegory by Percy Bysshe Shelley (full title: "Alastor; or, The Spirit of Solitude"). The protagonist is a solitary idealist/poet seeking ultimate truth and ideal love, rejecting real human love in the process. the quest fails and the protagonist dies young. Alastor means "avenging demon." No such character appears in the poem, but the implication is that the poet is punished for his selfishness in seeking ideal love while rejecting the love of his fellow beings. Not sure how this relates to Alastor Moody, unless we consider the idea of an avenger and eliminate the demon. Carol, who really doesn't want to associate Alastor Moody with the concept of nakedness, thank you! From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Dec 4 05:06:39 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 05:06:39 -0000 Subject: Apparation (Minerva McGonagall and Sirius Black (Was: Trusting characters ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119218 Arcum wrote: > Third, the concept of apparation hadn't been introduced until PoA. > Dumbledore appears & disappears, but no one else does, and JKR > may not have even planned it to be a widely available ability at > the time. Minerva doesn't even apparate from Privet Drive in Ch. 1 > of PS/SS. > > In fact, oddly, she never is mentioned leaving Privet Drive at all in > Ch. 1, which is interesting in itself... Carol responds: I thought the same thing until I checked recently. Dumbledore watches her "slinking around the corner at the other end of the street" before he turned on his heel, and with a swish of his cloak, he was gone" (SS/PS Am. ed. 16). I suppose this is apparation, Dumbledore style, or something like it. McGonagall, however, remains in cat form at least until she disappears from Dumbledore's view--and ours. I doubt, however, that she returned to 4 Privet Drive or that she remained in cat form for the entire trip back to Hogwarts. Similarly, Sirius Black probably changed to human form and apparated to somewhere near Hogwarts (though not an open street in Hogsmeade) when he followed Harry from Privet Drive to Hogwarts. Either that, or the dog had a long walk! At any rate, he didn't have Buckbeak at this point. Carol, blushing for forgetting about Buckbeak in another post to this thread and wondering how the poor creature is coping with the loss of Sirius From snow15145 at yahoo.com Sat Dec 4 05:15:33 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 05:15:33 -0000 Subject: Harry's Protection (was Re: Questions) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119219 Kneasy snipped: Consider the Dept. of Mysteries and the rooms the kids go through. Compare these with what DD has to say about what isn't in the Locked Room: "More wonderful and more terrible than Death (the Death Chamber), than human intelligence (the brain tank), than the forces of nature (the planetary system)." Throw in the paradoxes of Time as another make-weight mystery. To my mind what fits very well into this little list of subjects suitable for the study of the mysterious isn't love but the mystery of life itself. And when you recall that Voldy is about death (Death Eaters) and by attempting immortality is trying to circumvent natural life as we know it - well, I think I'm in with a fighting chance of being right. Just how she's going to relate this to Harry is something I haven't quite figured out yet. Snow: Another great thought from Kneasy! You always get me thinking and I believe I found an almost undetectable play in wording (don't know what else to call it) from Jo. Lets look at the entire statement made by DD: OOP- "There is a room in the Department of Mysteries," [ ], "that is kept locked at all times. It contains a force that is at once more wonderful and more terrible than death, than human intelligence, than forces of nature It is the power held within that room that you possess in such quantities and which Voldemort has not at all." A force that is at once more wonderful and more terrible than death to live forever! To live forever would be wonderful until everyone you have known has died. A force that is more wonderful and more terrible than human intelligence you would know everything! But who would you have to talk with if everyone is beneath your intellect? How about more wonderful and more terrible than forces of nature It would be like the beauty of the sea until the storm turns her into a devastating monster. The one thing that each of these statements maintain is the wonderful and terrible consequence. They are also something akin to what Dumbledore was speaking of in the end of the first book: SS- " You know, the Stone was really not such a wonderful thing. As much money and life as you could want! The two things most human beings would choose above all- the trouble is, humans do have a knack of choosing precisely those things that are worst for them." The Stone and all it had to offer was not such a wonderful thing because it had its terrible side also. The room at the DOM is said to 'contain' this force but it is also said that it is the 'power' that is 'held within this room' that Harry possesses in such great quantity that Voldemort detests. The room therefore contains a force 'and' holds a power. We may be dealing with two separate states of matter; the one that Harry possesses and the one contained in the room. Harry has already used this power when thwarting Voldemort's attempt to steal the Stone, which Dumbledore was "afraid" that the attempt killed him: SS- "I feared I might be too late." "You nearly were, I couldn't have kept him off the Stone much longer- " "Not the Stone, boy, you- the effort involved nearly killed you. For one terrible moment there, I was afraid it had." The power Harry had that night attempting to protect the Stone is the same power that is held within the room at the DOM. Harry's fight almost killed him that night but then again he was only eleven or so. The force that is contained in that same room must have to deal with immortality, given the previous quote from Dumbledore about the Stone not being such a wonderful thing etc. In the end my suspicions would be that immortality is the force that can be more wonderful and terrible and the power is `pure' self- sacrificing protection. Snow From bob.oliver at cox.net Sat Dec 4 05:14:51 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 05:14:51 -0000 Subject: Snape/Occlumency again (Was: Does Viktor Krum become an important In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119220 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > > I wouldn't call it *impossible* for Snape to change. I would call > it not especially likely after the pensieve fiasco. Hmmm. Actually I can easily see a scenario where he changes. That is, pressured by Dumbledore to allow Harry into his potions class, he simply ignores the boy (much as he did most of the time after the pensieve incident). Harry, in his turn, pretty much ignores Snape, and they develop a kind of frosty stalemate where neither actively attacks but neither forgives the other, either. Now, with regard to forgiving, I don't think we're going to see that from either party until something major happens. BUT I don't > know about the wisdom of keeping Harry & Snape apart. I rather > think they shouldn't avoid one another totally -- at least not for > long. Why? Because I think DD *is* toast and I think that some > reason will present itself why Harry & Snape DO have to work > together. [Which is where I insert my oh-so-not-popular theory that > Harry will act the "man" and grit his teeth and work w/ *Professor* > Snape even if Snape remains a prick.] > > Siriusly Snapey Susan Well, Dumbledore being toast would certainly fulfill some of the conventions of the hero's journey. As for Snape and Harry working together bar some extreme event to make them see each other in a different light -- nope, just isn't believable. That would put Harry on the fast track to sainthood, and if there's one good thing the kid ISN'T, it's a saint. Oh, and as for the issue brought up earlier in the thread by Carol regarding Harry being less arrogant, all I can say is I fervently hope he is not. Indeed, I hope he continues to develop the cold, sarcastic wit we glimpsed at points in OOTP. There are lots of people in his life, including Snape, who need a bitter taste of their own medicine. Lupinlore, who is looking forward to Harry referring to Snape as "Snivelus." From Arcum_Dagsson at celticwind.zzn.com Sat Dec 4 05:25:01 2004 From: Arcum_Dagsson at celticwind.zzn.com (Shanoah Alkire) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 05:25:01 -0000 Subject: Trusting characters Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119221 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > But, that aside, why would Sirius use the motorcycle rather than > apparating to Godric's Hollow? (Several answers have been given > upthread, but I haven't heard anything really convincing yet--other > than JKR's need to have Hagrid use the motorcycle since he either > can't apparate at all or can't apparate with a baby.) But I'm looking > for a convincing character-based explanation for why *Sirius* used it. > To be honest, we don't really know enough about the situation to say. we don't know what the motorcycle is capable of, what the protections (besides Fidelis) were on Godric Hollow, what alerted Sirius to what was going on, how much he knew, etc... There could have been anti-apparation wards around Godric Hollow. Also, he couldn't apparate directly inside the Potters House from outside because of Fidelis, IIRC, and he might not have made it so he didn't know the surrounding area well enough to apparate there. He may have placed a ward around Godric Hollow, been riding the motorcycle, had had an alarm signalling that it was broken go off, and it was quicker to stay on the motorcycle then to park it. He may even have been in the vicinity of Godric Hollow at the time. Heck, for all we know, the motorcycle apparates with its rider... :) Or perhaps he was in enough of a panic that he didn't think that he could apparate safely without splinching himself. > Anyway, if Sirius can't apparate, how did he get to the tropical > island (or whatever it was) where he was hiding at the beginning of > GoF? And how did he get back to England? He didn't have his motorcycle > (or a broom) in either case, and I doubt that he swam the English > Channel, much less a larger body of water like the Mediterranean Sea, > in either human or dog form. He's unlikely to have had a port key, > either, and Floo Powder wouldn't work for such a long journey. > Stowing away as Padfoot on a ship, and then disembarking? --Arcum From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Dec 4 05:32:43 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 05:32:43 -0000 Subject: Knowing it was Snape (was: What has Snape seen) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119222 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > > Eliose: > Letting us see Snape in the memories allows the information to be conveyed far more economically and therefore, I think, more effectively. Likewise, > > Harry's memories are told more economically from the first person > > viewpoint; the narrative would be more cumbersome if he had to be > > described seeing himself in the action. > > > > Potioncat: > But we do see Harry in the action in his memories in the first > session. Except for one memory and that one has no mention of > Harry. It's just Hermione, covered in fur. Carol adds: And not to be obnoxious or run my point into the ground, but Harry's memories are not narrated in the first person even though they're from his perspective. There's not a single "I" in the narrative portions of the books. We have something like, "He was nine. He was being chased up a tree by a dog" (very bad paraphrase, sorry). And it's true that we can't tell how *Harry* sees these memories, but it's quite clear that *Snape* can see both Harry and the dog. In any case, I think the Legilimency spell works like the Pensieve in making the memories appear in an objective visible form, but not, of course, a three-dimensional one that can be entered. Even a Legilimens like Voldemort or Dumbledore would see them in this form, not from the subjective viewpoint of the person remembering. As Snape tells us, Legilimency is not mind-reading. The Legilimens doesn't know the person's thoughts; he only sees the memories in a form that he can interpret. And that would include seeing the person whose memory is being viewed in recognizable form, whether that person is Snape or Harry. (The Hermione memory is an odd exception and would probably confuse Voldemort if he were to see it!) Carol From imamommy at sbcglobal.net Sat Dec 4 05:47:39 2004 From: imamommy at sbcglobal.net (imamommy at sbcglobal.net) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 05:47:39 -0000 Subject: The Demise of Lord Thingy--betrayed by a kiss (long) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119223 imamommy: There are several theories that have been rolling about in my brain, half-formed, for the last couple of weeks. I've been doing a lot of reading of the books, the wise opinions in this group, and articles by people who think about HP even more than I do, and I've pulled together a few half-baked ideas which I would like to turn over to some of the more clever minds here. Do with them what you will. Firstly, let me say that I don't think Harry's body has LV's soul in it. I've read several articles expressing this opinion, and I disagree with them, and most particularly with the idea that Voldy is in Harry's body, with Harry floating around somewhere. This is only based on my personal belief about the nature of a soul: I believe it to be the part of us that animates our shell, that we use to make decisions, and that essentially makes us who we are. Therefore, using my definition, Harry cannot be Voldy!Harry because he would know he was Voldy, and would make decisions accordingly. Also, Voldy is Voldy, and it seems to me that perhaps the only thing he had going for him after the failed AK *was* his soul. The tenacity with which he clung to mortal life, not even settling for the ghost plane, proves this to me. Another point: if Voldy!Harry were correct, then how can LV possess Harry at the end of OOP? If it causes that much pain to Harry to have Voldemort contaminate him, and hurt him in that way, how could he be more than just Harry? All that said, if there is anyone in these books I suspect having a soul other than his or her own, it would be Neville. Someone else's soul, and that soul was memory-charmed. Side note: Why did the DE's go after the Longbottoms, anyway? Something about torturing them for information about the Dark Lord's whereabouts? But how did they know 1) if LV had any whereabouts, and 2) that the Longbottoms would know anything about it if he did? Then I got to thinking about those soul-sucking dementors. "A fate worse than death," right? And isn't that pretty much what DD promised his former student? So, if Harry could get a Dementor to get smoochy with Voldy, he'd be all set, right? OK, you say, but then Voldemort might technically be surviving. Well maybe, but what do they do with people who receive a DK? Once the soul's gone, that pretty much takes away any will to live, eat, breathe, etc (assuming "soul" means what I think it does). And it wouldn't be very difficult to find some creature or person willing to destroy his body, once the soul is taken care of. Another side note: what *does* happen to those who've been DK'd? Where do they go? DO they die soon? Well, Dementors do serve LV, and he still likely commands his respect, unless... you trick him into possesing you, have a dementor handy to suck out his soul (but you get to keep yours) and are able to dispose of him that way, which is what I predict. I propose the theory that somehow Harry *will* get Voldy's soul in him, have it sucked out, and will become the only person to survive the Dementor's Kiss. After all, JKR did say Harry would be getting kissed again, but she wouldn't say by who! imamommy From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Sat Dec 4 03:23:23 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 19:23:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] werewolf vs animagus Message-ID: <20041204032323.52571.qmail@web53103.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119224 I was just re-reading PoA for the eleventh time, just looking for clues about everything and nothing, then something came up: It's a full moon night, Harry has just met his Godfather and realized he isn't a mad assassin, he's a good guy who loved his parents and who also loves him and is only trying to take care of him. After they leave the tunnel and the moon shows itself and Remus begins his transformation, Harry tries to do something but Sirius holds him back and he also transforms into an animagi (sp?), he wants to try and hold Lycantrophe Remus back. Is everyone there? OK, so Padfoot goes after Moony and drags him away from the kids, then the it says that the werewolf and the dog leave, jaws clenched together. So my question is: If Remus' and Sirius' jaws are clenched together it means that Remus is biting Sirius, right? Then why didn't Sirius became a werewolf? Furthermore, During the years the Marauders went out in the full moon, Remus never bit them? It seems unlikely, at least to me. So, is there any protection against a werewolf when a wizard is in his animagi form? Or there just isn't enough space in one wizard for his werewolf and his animagi form to exist at the same time? Just like I guess you can't be a metamorphmagus and animagus? I know there's no canon to back me up, but I just want to know your thoughts. Juli, who is driving herself mad thinking of which Theory will be proven right and which wrong in the HBP __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 250MB free storage. Do more. Manage less. http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250 From gbannister10 at aol.com Sat Dec 4 07:37:40 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 07:37:40 -0000 Subject: Harry's Protection (was Re: Questions) In-Reply-To: <20041203190413.72345.qmail@web53102.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119225 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Juli wrote: Juli: > But Harry wasn't at Priver Drive, we know that > nobody can harm him while he's at his aunt's house, so > I guess his protection doesn't work elsewhere, I mean, > he's been harm many times before. Geoff: True but there have been cases, not of this "shock" type admittedly, where he seems to have been protected away from number 4 - the school roof incident desrcibed in PS springs to mind. Harry, as well as the gang chasing him, was completely surprised to find himself up there... From gbannister10 at aol.com Sat Dec 4 07:45:52 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 07:45:52 -0000 Subject: Predictions for book 6 and 7. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119226 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: Meri: > 11. Draco is forced to come to some hard choices and, under a lot > of strain, he forgets to be nasty to the trio. Alla: > There is not much space left to write credible story of Draco's > redemption, IMO. Geoff: St.Paul managed it in about half a page of the New Testament. Acts 9:1-19 :-)) From technomad at intergate.com Sat Dec 4 08:01:10 2004 From: technomad at intergate.com (ericoppen) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 08:01:10 -0000 Subject: Racism in the WW and MW Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119227 One thing to keep in mind is that our modern notion that "racism" (however defined) is unBigBrotherwise unIngsocful doubledoubleplusungood (to borrow some Newspeak from _1984_) is very, very recent. When my parents were young, the "N word" was standard speech in a lot of the US, and just before I was born, there was still deep enough suspicion of Catholics that JF Kennedy had to specifically promise not to be under the Pope's domination to win the US Presidency. The WW changes socially to match the MW, but much more slowly. Hence, it's not surprising that old suspicions of Muggle-born magic folk, as well as dodgier creatures like giants, is still very much the norm. Attitudes like the Malfoys', or their analogues, would have been perfectly normal in Britain up till relatively very recently. Also---I do think that it needs pointing out that wizards' feelings toward Muggles are not quite analogous to racism. Like it or not, by their standards Muggles are, at best, crippled. From bboyminn at yahoo.com Sat Dec 4 08:59:31 2004 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 08:59:31 -0000 Subject: Neville's choice (was: ghosts, ...etc... - Minor Point) In-Reply-To: <200412020818454.SM01064@devbox> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119228 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Vivamus" wrote: > > > > bboyminn: > > > > This is a common misstatement, Harry didn't choose > > Gryffindor, he chose NOT Slytherin. I'm guessing based on > > statements by Ron, Hagrid, and Hermoine, Harry probably has a > > preference for Gryffindor, but he never had a chance to > > actually state that preference. ... > > > > Setve/bboyminn (was bboy_mn) > Vivamus: > > ...edited.. > > I absolutely agree, Steve, that Harry is the quintessential > Gryffindor. You are right, all he chose was "not Slytherin," .... > My point is that Harry's choice played into the SH selection. If it > did, then I think we need to ask ourselves just how MUCH does choice > play a part. > > Vivamus bboyminn: Ask yourself this, with his definite overriding lack of selfconfidence, what are the odds that Neville choose 'not Gryffindor'? I would speculate that it would be possible for Neville to argue with the Hat and say 'I'm not good enough for Gryffindor, I should be in Hufflepuff'. I furthur speculate that the Hat overrode Neville's objections, and placed him in Gryffindor anyway, seeing in him things that were impossible in that moment for Neville to see in himself. Yes, is all speculation, but if we can speculate, with some foundation, that the Sorting Hat considers a students choice, isn't it reasonable that the Hat would disregard a student's choice when it knows that choice goes against the student's true nature? The Sorting Hat was designed for one purpose, and that is to sort the students in to Houses according to the criteria setup by the founders. It's not to assist the student in /bunking/ with their friends, or carrrying on the family tradition, or engaging in a popularity contest based on students whimsical and fickle desires. So, I contend that the Sorting Hat's dialog with the student may give it some clues as to what is best; choice being only one of the clues, as well as underlying motivation for that choise, and others. I think it is those clues rather that the students actual choice that helps the Sorting Hat decide. Again, the hat sees far deeper into a student than the superficial. It sees character and characteristics that know one else can see. Afteral, who in the first year would have been able to guess that Neville was a brave hero and a fearless fighter? Who would have guessed that just a few years later, it would be Neville who was saving the great Harry Potter? In a sense, the Hat doesn't ignore choice, but at the same time, it doesn't yeild to it either. The student's choice does tell the hat something about the student, but I think the Hat is more likely to consider at what is behind that choice than to consider the choice itself. If you get my drift. Steve/bboyminn (was bboy_mn) From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Sat Dec 4 12:59:48 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 12:59:48 -0000 Subject: Snape/Occlumency again (Was: Does Viktor Krum become an important In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119229 SSSusan: > snip. > [Which is where I insert my oh-so-not-popular theory that Harry > will act the "man" and grit his teeth and work w/ *Professor* > Snape even if Snape remains a prick.] Alla: > Yes, Susan, your theories are always popular in my mind, but I > hope that events will turn out in a little bit different > direction. :o) SSSusan: No, no, I think you missed the key word "not" in that parenthetical statement! So you would like for Snape to change. I always love asking this question: Do you have a vision of how Snape could change in a manner which would both convince Harry he's "an okay guy" and be believable to us readers? Or have I misunderstood which direction you're hoping things go? Siriusly Snapey Susan From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Sat Dec 4 13:03:02 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (Barry Arrowsmith) Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2004 13:03:02 +0000 Subject: Harry's Protection (was Re: Questions) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119230 Responses to SSS and snow in this one. > I'm rather surprised there has been no response to this yet onlist, for it really is a fascinating view. Yes, I've spouted off about Sacrificial Love, and I still think I've got a chance to be right on that, but this is nice how you've incorporated some of the other rooms in the DoM, as well as Voldy being opposite Life with his *Death* eaters. My one question, thoughL: Why would Life or Life Force be more wonderful nd **terrible** than death? > Kneasy: Not the first time it's happened - the original post (89016) didn't attract much comment either. As for 'terrible' - it's a word DD seems to throw around occasionally, not always appropriately IMO. However, the word can and is used in RL in ways that devalue or subtly alter it's original meaning - capable of inducing terror. Usually it's used as a synonym in situations where tough, sad, unfortunate, overwhelming, and so on could also apply. In that sense life could be terrible - you're stuck with what you're presented with - a struggle from the moment you're born. And you just have to grit your teeth and get on with it no matter what. By comparison death (*not* the act of dying, but the condition of being dead) is a doddle. Requires no hard work or effort at all. Certainly it would seem that Harry's predicament is one long terrible struggle. Besides, when thinking of the power as 'life', I can't help remembering the title of the first chapter of the first book: "The Boy Who Lived." Appropriate, no? > snow: Another great thought from Kneasy! You always get me thinking and I believe I found an almost undetectable play in wording (don't know what else to call it) from Jo. Lets look at the entire statement made by DD: OOP- "There is a room in the Department of Mysteries," [?], "that is kept locked at all times. It contains a force that is at once more wonderful and more terrible than death, than human intelligence, than forces of nature?It is the power held within that room that you possess in such quantities and which Voldemort has not at all." A force that is at once more wonderful and more terrible than death? to live forever! To live forever would be wonderful until everyone you have known has died. A force that is more wonderful and more terrible than human intelligence?you would know everything! But who would you have to talk with if everyone is beneath your intellect? How about more wonderful and more terrible than forces of nature?It would be like the beauty of the sea until the storm turns her into a devastating monster. The Stone and all it had to offer was not such a wonderful thing because it had its terrible side also. In the end my suspicions would be that immortality is the force that can be more wonderful and terrible and the power is `pure' self- sacrificing protection. > Kneasy: A different take to mine, but that's not important - working up a theory that you're happy with and are willing to defend is. At least we seem to agree that it's about life or some aspect of it, the struggle to survive and thrive from me, the consequences (welcome and unwelcome) of immortality from snow. Good. Maybe with a bit of luck a crowd will gather and we can start smiting the opposition hip and thigh. Dunno about you, but I've never considered that immortality should be considered as a boon, it's more of a curse IMO. Many folk tales look at it the same way. Not only is there the eventual dreadful dreariness of one damn day after another, stretching out to eternity, there's also the snag that although you're immortal, that doesn't guarantee that you'll stay young. By and large, I'd go along with your contention that to live forever, to know everything, would be a real frost. Nothing new - ever. Terminal ennui and perpetual boredom, something that I get hints of when looking at the TV schedules. However, for the time being I'll stick with life and/or life force in it's more conventional form as my pick. To do otherwise would argue that Harry (who possesses this power) is immortal himself. Hmm. A biologist/geneticist can comfortably argue that our DNA *is* immortal, having being passed down more or less unchanged from pre-history. (It doesn't matter in this case that you and I are eventually odds on to turn up our toes, which would knock immortality on the head, 'cos we're still alive *now* - and the best description of an immortal is someone who isn't dead *yet*.) But is JKR au fait with biological thinking? Probably not. From willsonkmom at msn.com Sat Dec 4 13:16:06 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 13:16:06 -0000 Subject: Duffers (was:Slytherin House again) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119231 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > Potioncat signed off with: ... but would fit very well in > > Hufflepuff and BTW, what is a duffer? > > Carol responds: > Someone who duffs? Seriously, in American English, it means a really > bad golfer and consequently a clumsy or inept person. I'm not sure > whether that's the British meaning or not, but I'm sure I'll be > corrected if it isn't. > Potioncat: Yes, I can see it now, dictionaries at ten paces! "An inept person" am I last the one on the list to get the joke that it's "Hagrid" who makes the duffer comment? Given the original topic of this thread, it speaks volumes that Cedric was a Hufflepuff and not clumsy or inept, there's hope for Slytherin yet. Potioncat who,now more than ever, would fit in Hufflepuff... From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Sat Dec 4 13:20:22 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 13:20:22 -0000 Subject: Snape/Occlumency again (Was: Does Viktor Krum become an important In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119232 SSSusan: >>I wouldn't call it *impossible* for Snape to change. I would call it not especially likely after the pensieve fiasco. BUT I don't know about the wisdom of keeping Harry & Snape apart. I rather think they shouldn't avoid one another totally -- at least not for long. Why? Because I think DD *is* toast and I think that some reason will present itself why Harry & Snape DO have to work together. [Which is where I insert my oh-so-not-popular theory that Harry will act the "man" and grit his teeth and work w/ *Professor* Snape even if Snape remains a prick.]<< Lupinlore: > Hmmm. Actually I can easily see a scenario where he changes. > That is, pressured by Dumbledore to allow Harry into his potions > class, he simply ignores the boy (much as he did most of the time > after the pensieve incident). Harry, in his turn, pretty much > ignores Snape, and they develop a kind of frosty stalemate where > neither actively attacks but neither forgives the other, either. > As for Snape and Harry working together bar some extreme event to > make them see each other in a different light -- nope, just isn't > believable. That would put Harry on the fast track to sainthood, > and if there's one good thing the kid ISN'T, it's a saint. SSSusan: I think we may be thinking different things about what I meant by the phrase "working together." I was actually thinking primarily of their needing to be able to work -- *along with others* -- towards the Order's goals. That is, actually be in the same room, actually speak and *listen* to one another when necessary, actually grudgingly trust one another enough to believe the other is on the same side. I hadn't really thought of their working together -- just the two of them -- on some project like developing a new potion or something. Nope, nope, no way I could see that at this point. But if Snape could even ignore Harry most of the time, as you suggest, that would be change in Snape and it would allow Harry to be more in control of his own emotions. Now, I don't want Harry to revert to a less-CAPSLOCKY phase, either, just more in control. I think he is where he is, and being more forceful than he was at 12 or 14 is there to stay. But I love your phrase "frosty sort of stalemate!" To me, that would probably be the *most* the two could ever hope for. The reason I say that is that I believe for there to be a frosty sort of stalemate, there has to be a willingness to change on *both* their parts. Not a total end to their outbursts with one another, most likely, but an acceptance that the other really *is* working towards the end of defeating Voldemort. So maybe if Snape were to mostly ignore, we could reach that frosty stalemate? > Lupinlore, who is looking forward to Harry referring to Snape > as "Snivelus." SSSusan: Now *that* would be interesting. But I suspect the frosty stalemate would heat back up into battle phase if Harry did! Siriusly Snapey Susan, who loves contemplating where the Harry/Snape "relationship" might head from here. From Zarleycat at aol.com Sat Dec 4 13:29:10 2004 From: Zarleycat at aol.com (kiricat2001) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 13:29:10 -0000 Subject: Trusting characters Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119233 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > Carol notes: > But, that aside, why would Sirius use the motorcycle rather than > apparating to Godric's Hollow? (Several answers have been given > upthread, but I haven't heard anything really convincing yet--other > than JKR's need to have Hagrid use the motorcycle since he either > can't apparate at all or can't apparate with a baby.) But I'm looking > for a convincing character-based explanation for why *Sirius* used it. > > Someone suggested that Sirius may not know how to apparate, and I'll > grant that that's possible. Maybe he thought that as an animagus, he > didn't need to learn. But since he's a bit of a show-off and likes to > take risks, I can't imagine him choosing not to learn (or James, > either). And I would think that if you're good at Transfiguration, > you'd be good at making yourself disappear and reappear. Maybe? Marianne: A suggestion from out of left field - maybe Sirius was prohibited from learning how to Apparate. Much has been made by some listies of Sirius never being punished for the Prank. We don't know canon-wise if that's true or not, but part of Snape's lingering anger about this can be interpreted to mean that whatever punishment was meted out was not severe enough to satisfy him. Well, perhaps part of the punishment was that this particular bit of magic was denied to Sirius. And, since he was prohibited from getting the Ministry- approved license to Apparate, he retaliated in Sirius-like fashion by getting his hands on a motorcycle and charming it to fly. Illegal, as is was the flying Ford Anglia, but obviously something that wizards can do in private without the Ministry knowing about it. Marianne, idly speculating while listening to the cats fight. From willsonkmom at msn.com Sat Dec 4 13:38:57 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 13:38:57 -0000 Subject: Snape/Occlumency again (Was: Does Viktor Krum become an important In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119234 Lupinlore wrote: > > Oh, and as for the issue brought up earlier in the thread by Carol > regarding Harry being less arrogant, all I can say is I fervently > hope he is not. Indeed, I hope he continues to develop the cold, > sarcastic wit we glimpsed at points in OOTP. There are lots of > people in his life, including Snape, who need a bitter taste of their > own medicine. Potioncat: You mean, you want Harry to become more like Snape? To be honest, there have been times that I've thought that Snape is really Grownup!Harry, but I can't make it work out. Potioncat From willsonkmom at msn.com Sat Dec 4 13:50:05 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 13:50:05 -0000 Subject: Knowing it was Snape (was: What has Snape seen) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119235 > Carol adds: > And not to be obnoxious or run my point into the ground, but Harry's > memories are not narrated in the first person even though they're from > his perspective. There's not a single "I" in the narrative portions of > the books. We have something like, "He was nine. He was being chased > up a tree by a dog" (very bad paraphrase, sorry). And it's true that > we can't tell how *Harry* sees these memories, but it's quite clear > that *Snape* can see both Harry and the dog. > Potioncat: Not to beat a dead horse...and to be honest I no longer remember the point of this discussion...but I think Carol and I are saying the same thing.(whether the wording is sees himself or told in 3rd person)(Although I think Carol said it much better.) My point is Harry is always in the scene except for the one with Hermione. That may mean that the individual isn't always in their own memories or it may mean that if JKR was reading this post she would think "My God what a lot of nitpicking time wasters!" And more than likely all those boys in the memories are Snape, but I'll allow others to hold to their theories. (Having been granted the authotity to permit such things by my advanced age.) Potioncat From willsonkmom at msn.com Sat Dec 4 13:55:36 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 13:55:36 -0000 Subject: Neville's choice (was: ghosts, ...etc... - Minor Point) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119236 Steve/bboyminn (was bboy-mn) (and isn't Lexicon Steve) wrote a longer post but I had to follow rules and snip most of it: > In a sense, the Hat doesn't ignore choice, but at the same time, it > doesn't yeild to it either. The student's choice does tell the hat > something about the student, but I think the Hat is more likely to > consider at what is behind that choice than to consider the choice itself. > > If you get my drift. > Potioncat: I think you are most likely right. We know of two students who had some sort of conversation with the Sorting Hat, and it would follow that others have had conversations too. But I think the Hat has a job to do, and it isn't going to be swayed by students or parents or teachers...and I'll bet Snape wasn't too happy to get all four DE sons that year! Potioncat hoping this is long enough to be pass the "Me Too" restriction. From Zarleycat at aol.com Sat Dec 4 14:01:00 2004 From: Zarleycat at aol.com (kiricat2001) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 14:01:00 -0000 Subject: Snape's hero complex In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119237 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "curlyhornedsnorkack" wrote: > If Snape is suffering from a hero complex, it could explain a lot of > things about him: his pride, his thirst for recognition and respect, > his actions towards Harry and the Marauders, why he joined and left > the death eaters, his willingness to risk his life to fight Voldemort, > possibly why Dumbledore trusts him, and why he wasn't allowed to be > DADA teacher. (I write "hero complex", a boring old cliche for Harry's > "problem", on purpose.) > > The following are some proofs of his works as a hero. When Snape was a > student, he worked to expose a werewolf, and to expell some school > bullies at his own risk. In SS/PS, Snape is the only teacher who works > in the background to save Harry and the stone. In POA, Dumbledore > relies on Snape to be in charge of searching for Sirius in the > building. In the shrieking shack, Snape thinks he is saving Harry's > life from Sirius. And of course, Snape has risked his life to spy on > the Death Eaters. (The recent message 119077 mentions examples of how > Snape has been a force for good.) Marianne: Well, I have a few issues with these. Snape, as a kid wasn't working to expose a werewolf - he wanted to know where Lupin went. In SS/PS, other teachers were involved in putting in place the series of tests that one had to pass through to get to the Stone. And, we also have evidence that Snape had grave suspicions, if not actual knowledge, about what was going on with Quirrel, but there's no evidence that he went to DD to let him in on that. In POA, everyone was involved with searhcing the building for Sirius. No argument from me on the spy thing. Curleyhornedsnorkack: > I've always had a problem imagining Snape as a realistic character > because I can't envisage how a grown man could have so much hatred for > a child, because of something that happened in the past, especially a > child orphaned before he even knew his father. I think the problem is > that something current is bothering Snape, and that is that Harry is a > rival Hero who is more successful. But Harry has all the > glory, almost from birth, for something for which he isn't really > responsible. It't just not fair, and Snape hates it when people don't > play by the rules. The degree to which Snape seems to fixate on > Harry's celebrity indicates to me that Harry's fame is what bothers > him most. Marianne: There's something to be said for this. I think, if this is really what motivates Snape, it shows a gigantic blind spot on his part where Harry's concerned. Snape seems incapable of seeing beyond Harry's celebrity. He reacts to the perception of "famous Harry Potter" rather than to Harry the kid. Snape may very well thirst for respect and acknowledgment of his gifts and what he has done in the past towards defeating Voldemort. He may feel he has never received due recognition. But, what he doesn't get is that Harry does not react in the same way. Harry's encounters with Voldemort have been things he's undertaken because he thinks he has to do them at the time. He's not doing them to be famous or lauded or recognized or to get an Order of Merlin. There may very well be a hero-thing going on with both characters, but I think Harry is much more reluctant to see his actions as achievements worthy of public praise. Maybe what gets up Snape's nose is that he *does* recognize this about Harry, but hates that, in comparison to himself, Harry's motives are more self-less. Harry knows someone is in danger and he reacts - he goes to save Ginny in CoS and Sirius in OoP. He may be too impulsive in how he goes about it, but he does it because he thinks it must be done. He doesn't seem to have the hunger for recognition and respect Snape has. Marianne From Zarleycat at aol.com Sat Dec 4 14:21:39 2004 From: Zarleycat at aol.com (kiricat2001) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 14:21:39 -0000 Subject: Reputations (was Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119238 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "demetra1225" wrote: > It is no secret that I am a bit of a Snape-ophile, and I try to > figure out what makes him tick. I also try to figure out where the > obvious mutual hatred between Severus and Sirius/James came from. I > hope JKR does divulge more about their history in future books, but > in the meantime I have cooked up my own version of a backstory. I do > acknowledge that James' enmity towards Severus has some basis in his > hatred of the Dark Arts. > > I think that Severus and Sirius both come from families associated > with Dark Arts. > So why did 2 boys from such similar backgrounds end up hating each > other? > I think the impetus for the rejection of his upbringing was James. > I think that Sirius met James on the Hogwarts Express, like Harry met > Ron. They hit it off. James shared with Sirius that he came from a > long line of Gryffindors who despised the Dark Arts. Sirius, not > wanting to ruin this potential friendship, doesn't share that he > comes from a family of Slytherins who practice the Dark Arts (and > later asks the Sorting Hat to place him in Gryffindor). > Sirius does offer up to James that Severus Snape's family members are > all Slytherins who are into the Dark Arts. After all, what better > for young boys to bond over, than a mutual enemy? Thus, the > beginning of Severus as the target of James and Snape's taunting. > Severus, having much the same personality we see in the adult Snape, > does give back as good as he gets. And Severus, knowing full well > what Sirius Black's background is, sees Sirius as either a betrayer > of his heritage (by denying it) or as a coward for condemning Severus > to James' ridicule while hiding his own background. > Marianne: I do hope JKR gives us this background info some day. Your explanation certainly could work, as could one that is less sympathetic to Snape. Say something along the lines of Snape having the backing of the older students, Lucius Malfoy and Bellatrix Black, in confronting first-year Sirius over his unforgivable sorting into Gryffindor. We'll have to wait and see how (and if) this plays out. I think you're on to something by bringing the concept of cowardice up. "Coward" seems to be a hot-button word between Snape and Sirius, as evidenced by their confrontation in the kitchen in OoP. That scene struck me as laden with echoes of past battles between the two, where either or both accused the other of being a chicken. And, that tendency is still with them as the adults they supposedly are. Marianne From elsyee_h at yahoo.com Sat Dec 4 14:23:15 2004 From: elsyee_h at yahoo.com (Tammy) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 14:23:15 -0000 Subject: werewolf vs animagus In-Reply-To: <20041204032323.52571.qmail@web53103.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119239 Juli wrote: > *snip* > > So my question is: If Remus' and Sirius' jaws are > clenched together it means that Remus is biting > Sirius, right? Then why didn't Sirius became a > werewolf? Furthermore, During the years the Marauders > went out in the full moon, Remus never bit them? It > seems unlikely, at least to me. So, is there any > protection against a werewolf when a wizard is in his > animagi form? Or there just isn't enough space in one > wizard for his werewolf and his animagi form to exist > at the same time? Just like I guess you can't be a > metamorphmagus and animagus? I know there's no canon > to back me up, but I just want to know your thoughts. > Tammy replies I know it says in POA that a werewolf is only dangerous to people, that's why WPP were safe in animal form when they ran around back in the good old days. As for why Sirius didn't become a werewolf, first of all, how do you know he didn't? :P (don't really believe that, just tossing it up) Perhaps it's the werewolf's nature to only release whatever substance it is that turns one into a werewolf into a human. Or animals have a natural defense against it that an animagus has only in animal form. I personally thought that Remus had only really broken skin on Sirius with his claws, not his mouth. Maybe Remus didn't use enough force to draw blood with his jaw when their jaws were locked together. -Tammy From Zarleycat at aol.com Sat Dec 4 14:27:27 2004 From: Zarleycat at aol.com (kiricat2001) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 14:27:27 -0000 Subject: werewolf vs animagus In-Reply-To: <20041204032323.52571.qmail@web53103.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119240 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Juli wrote: > > So my question is: If Remus' and Sirius' jaws are > clenched together it means that Remus is biting > Sirius, right? Then why didn't Sirius became a > werewolf? Furthermore, During the years the Marauders > went out in the full moon, Remus never bit them? It > seems unlikely, at least to me. So, is there any > protection against a werewolf when a wizard is in his > animagi form? Or there just isn't enough space in one > wizard for his werewolf and his animagi form to exist > at the same time? Just like I guess you can't be a > metamorphmagus and animagus? I know there's no canon > to back me up, but I just want to know your thoughts. Marianne: Somewhere in Lupin's explanation in the Shrieking Shack scene (sorry - books are in boxes) he clearly says that werewolves are dangerous to humans, not other animals and thus would not infect wizards if they were bitten in their animagus forms. What has always puzzled me about the scene you describe above is that, IIRC, it is stated that Padfoot has been bitten. Yet, when Sirius is back in human form, no evidence is given that the injuries come back with him. I guess this is just one of those things that can only be explained by saying "It's magic." Marianne, thrilled to have some time to actually participate on the list! From elsyee_h at yahoo.com Sat Dec 4 14:28:00 2004 From: elsyee_h at yahoo.com (Tammy) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 14:28:00 -0000 Subject: Harry's Protection (was Re: Questions) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119241 > Juli wrote: > > But Harry wasn't at Priver Drive, we know that > > nobody can harm him while he's at his aunt's house, so > > I guess his protection doesn't work elsewhere, I mean, > > he's been harm many times before. > > Geoff replies: > True but there have been cases, not of this "shock" type admittedly, > where he seems to have been protected away from number 4 - the school > roof incident desrcibed in PS springs to mind. Harry, as well as the > gang chasing him, was completely surprised to find himself up there... Tammy adds: Dumbledore says that as long as Harry "still call(s) home the place where your mother's blood dwells" he cannot be harmed by LV. It sounds like he's protected everywhere as long as he still returns to Privet Drive for a short time during the summer. But, it also sounds like he's only protected from LV, not from everyone. -Tammy From spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com Sat Dec 4 14:35:14 2004 From: spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com (dungrollin) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 14:35:14 -0000 Subject: OOP: The unknown power In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119242 Geoff wrote: Which brings me back to a point I have been banging on about in the past at various times. In English, we have not managed to cope with the linguistic problems of the four Greek words which C.S Lewis called the "Four Loves" - eros, philos, storge and agape. The lifeboatmen I know personally go out because they feel a call - for want of a better word - to go and help, save, rescue those who are in a particular need. They do not "love" them in the sense of wanting to have a physical relationship with them, they do not have the same feelings towards them that they might have to family members but they are fellow human beings who have a need which can be met by the actions of these men who know that with the risks that they take on some shouts, they might not come back. This is the sort of love/compassion/sympathy/empathy which leads people to jump into rivers to save drowning strangers; it is the motivation behind folk who exchanged places with strangers in Nazi death camps and went to the gas chambers in their place. It is also the motivation which drove Lily to stand between Harry and Voldemort and it is that same motivation which drives Harry to prepare to stand up to Voldemort in PS when he thinks that Snape is getting the Stone for him. Dungrollin replies: You see, I'd disagree about lumping all those examples together. You mentioned it above ? "they do not have the same feelings towards them that they might have to family members". I think there's a very different motivation for Lily dying to save Harry than there is for someone to leap into a river to save a drowning stranger. Plenty of people wouldn't save a drowning stranger, if it were obvious that they may be paying with their life. But how many mothers would say `Oh sure, kill the kid but not me'? I don't have any children, so I can't imagine what it would be like; but I can imagine being far more willing to leap into a river to save a niece or nephew than a stranger. You seem to me to be distinguishing between different kinds of love, yet insisting that they should all be treated the same. This is exactly what I mean about the differences in our use of the word `love'. If you mean compassion/empathy/sympathy, then I think you should say `compassion/empathy/sympathy'. To include all of them under the catch-all of love is very Christian, but to my mind a misuse of the word. Of course, if we were to eliminate acts of kindness caused by compassion, sympathy and empathy we would end up in a nightmare. And because we're never going to agree on the use of the word `love', what we mean by `sacrificial love' is never going to be the same either. I think we might agree that Harry has a strong sense of responsibility to others, when others are in real danger (his `saving people thing'). You might call it love, but I don't. And it's not general, either, I couldn't see Harry risking his neck to save Lucius Malfoy, for example. JKR may have alluded to sacrificial love in Lily's death (the paragraph, now snipped, that you quoted previously), but she's never given any reason to suppose that this kind of love fills Harry. Here are his reasons for going through the trapdoor, PS `Through the Trapdoor'. "SO WHAT?" Harry shouted. "Don't you understand? If Snape gets hold of the Stone, Voldemort's coming back! Haven't you heard what it was like when he was trying to take over? There won't be any Hogwarts to get expelled from! He'll flatten it, or turn it into a school for the Dark Arts! Losing points doesn't matter any more, can't you see? D'you think he'll leave you and your families alone if Gryffindor win the House Cup? If I get caught before I can get to the Stone, well, I'll have to go back to the Dursleys and wait for Vodemort to find me there. It's only dying a bit later than I would have done, because I'm never going over to the Dark Side! I'm going through that trapdoor tonight and nothing you two say is going to stop me! Voldemort killed my parents, rememeber?" Sounds more to me like fear with a tinge of vengeance, than all- consuming love. And there's an explicit example of him being brave in the face of death. If the power behind the door is what sent Harry off down the trapdoor in PS, why not call it courage? From moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com Sat Dec 4 15:56:36 2004 From: moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com (K G) Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2004 07:56:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Predictions for book 6 and 7. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041204155636.94628.qmail@web53505.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119243 Something that bothered me in OotP. At the end of GoF DD made the big speach that included an invitation to the students of the other 2 schools, especially Durmstrang, to come back to Hogwarts. None of the students took him up on it in OotP (or at least it was not mentioned again). Maybe this was because of the Daily Prophet articles. Will we see some of the students coming from there to Hogwarts now that LV is "out"? Conversely, will we see any of Slytherin moving to another school (like Durmstrang)? IIRC Draco mentioned in GoF that his father wanted to send him there "because they taught the dark arts and not just defence", but that his mother did not want him to be so far from home. Could the HPB come from another school? Could one or more of the teachers from there come? We need at least one new teacher... but could we have a couple of "substitute teachers" come in (like Grubblyplank did) to help releave the teaching duties for Snape, MM, and others while they are doing things in the LV resistance? moonmyyst (who loves to read all the great and crazy ideas we come up with and cannot wait for JKR to give up the twist that none of us thought of!!) p.s.... If you could ask JKR just one thing, what would it be? (that she might actually answer!!) 1) Is Snape a vamp? 2) Does Snape have kids? 3) How does DD see all the things going on in Privet Drive before and while Harry is getting his letters in SS/PS? 4) Just what is up with the nose biting tea cups? --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - now with 250MB free storage. Learn more. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dontask2much at yahoo.com Sat Dec 4 16:27:01 2004 From: dontask2much at yahoo.com (charme) Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2004 11:27:01 -0500 Subject: Bloodlines & Social Order Backstory (Was: Another Flint) References: Message-ID: <01df01c4da1e$15999fc0$6701a8c0@MITRE.ORG> No: HPFGUIDX 119244 <> > Carol again: > First my apologies for being unclear. I certainly didn't mean that > *you* were rewriting the story, and I'd be the last person to > criticize theorizing or speculation on any point (though I confess > there are topics I avoid because I find them a bit too speculative for > my taste). > > I meant that JKR, via her narrator and the various characters, > established Colin creevey and the other victims of the basilisk as > Muggleborns in CoS. *She* would have to rewrite the story to give them > a different heritage if she thought it was important to do so, but > she'd have to go to a lot of trouble to explain how the basilisk and > Tom (or Ginny) got it wrong. > > I agree that a lot of attention has been focused on Dennis Creevey's > size (not to mention that he established in my mind, at least, that > the Giant Squid is a "good guy"), and I'm sure we'll see more of both > Creevey brothers. I'm also sure that Dennis Creevey's size will play a > fairly important role. (We'll also see more of Dean Thomas's skill > with calligraphy and drawing; otherwise, why establish it in the > narrative?) But, IMO, there's no need to change what we've been told > about their heritage to do so. After all, we've yet to be told why > Flitwick and Dedalus Diggle are tiny. Maybe, like Hagrid, Professor > Flitwick will be revealed to have a nonhuman parent. But the Creeveys > have been established as Muggleborns, and I think it would be more > trouble than it's worth *to JKR* to explain how not only the Creeveys > themselves but Ginny and Tom and apparently McGonagall and Dumbledore > were wrong about victims being Muggleborns. charme responds, Thanks for clearing that up, however we differ on an important point (that's not bad, just to each his own, aye?), the one being that JKR would have to "rewrite" anything to do with the social blood classifications and monikers she's established. I think there's more to that rationale than we've been told, and this may be part of the intent of the next book. I might also mention that in my mind, there has to be more a backstory not only with bloodline geneaology, but also history around the creature classification denoted to elves, goblins, and centaurs simply because they are referenced repeatedly in all of the books and more importantly in the DoM chapters of OoP. Add to that the revelation that giants and wizards married, wizards and Muggles, and one has to wonder that through some of the families bloodlines, if there aren't other creatures who have been in the mix in the genealogy in some way. All it takes is the six degrees of seperation argument applied to genetics, then all manners of possibilities exist. Otherwise, why introduce half giants, and the various allusions to: appearing "troll" like (Flint), tiny (Colin, Dennis, Flitwick), large (Madame Maxime) loping (the new character in HPB, which makes me connect loping with lions) duck footed & round shouldered (Krum) I'm sure there are others and would love to list them all. I also note Ron's comments in CoS that state that wizards would have died out if they hadn't started to marry Muggles - might that be the same for the other races like elves and goblins? Add this to why statues of supposed *creatures* would appear in the MoM along with wizards who believe their races to be beneath them? DD alludes to an answer when talking to Harry in his office after the DoM battle, by saying for too long wizards have mistreated and abused their fellows and are reaping their reward - and the statues in the MoM depict and are describe to the reader as almost a "greater than thou" attitude of dominance over them. Notice the word "fellows" DD uses, which by the definition in Webster's includes the word "equal." Here in the US, our Civil War was fought in part to free "creatures": black slaves who were considered "beasts" by their masters and slave traders - yet that didn't stop Jefferson from having a relationship with one his "slaves." Since JKR has referenced racial inequality and WW2 in her comments on various interviews, chats and her website, I can only surmise there's more backstory to be generated to these references. From stevejjen at earthlink.net Sat Dec 4 16:26:27 2004 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 16:26:27 -0000 Subject: Harry's Protection (was Re: Questions) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119245 Snow: > The room at the DOM is said to 'contain' this force but it is also > said that it is the 'power' that is 'held within this room' that > Harry possesses in such great quantity that Voldemort detests. The > room therefore contains a force 'and' holds a power. We may be > dealing with two separate states of matter; the one that Harry > possesses and the one contained in the room. > > In the end my suspicions would be that immortality is the force that > can be more wonderful and terrible and the power is `pure' self- > sacrificing protection. Jen: This is good, Snow! My first thought was, "but Harry isn't immortal" then I realized you're saying the power Harry possesses in great quantities is essentially the opposite power from the one that drove Voldemort to seek immortality. And you make a good case for immortality being more wonderful and terrible than any other force. I do wonder though, since it's a power Voldemort 'detests' whether we're not back to the idea of pure Sacrificial Love (SSSusan's gets the nod here) and not just pure self-sacrifice. Harry has definitely shown over and over he is willing to sacrifice himself, most notably in OOTP when Voldemort possesses him. But it was Harry's feelings of love for Sirius and total lack of fear of death that ultimately drove Voldemort away in that instance. To me, self-sacrifice must be for a greater or higher purpose to be something other than killing yourself. I'm not trying to sound tacky there, but do you know what I mean? True, pure self-sacrifice is about Love in the end. And then there's the question of how Harry came to have this power and Voldemort not at all. Did Voldemort reject this power in his quest for immortality or never have it to begin with? We know he wasn't born evil, he must have possessed this power in *some* small quantity at least. Jen Reese From eloiseherisson at aol.com Sat Dec 4 16:32:31 2004 From: eloiseherisson at aol.com (eloise_herisson) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 16:32:31 -0000 Subject: Knowing it was Snape (was: What has Snape seen) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119246 Carol (quoting aomeone else's mis-spelling): > > > Eliose: (Eloise wonder if that's something like otiose ) > > Letting us see Snape in the memories allows the information to be > conveyed far more economically and therefore, I think, more > effectively. Likewise, > > > Harry's memories are told more economically from the first person > > > viewpoint; the narrative would be more cumbersome if he had to be > > > described seeing himself in the action. > > > > > > > Potioncat: > > But we do see Harry in the action in his memories in the first > > session. Except for one memory and that one has no mention of > > Harry. It's just Hermione, covered in fur. > > > Carol adds: > And not to be obnoxious or run my point into the ground, Eloise: ditto Carol: but Harry's > memories are not narrated in the first person even though they're from > his perspective. There's not a single "I" in the narrative portions of > the books. We have something like, "He was nine. He was being chased > up a tree by a dog" (very bad paraphrase, sorry). Eloise: The verbatim version is in my reply to Potioncat's above quoted post. (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/119147) I didn't say that they are grammatically told in the first person, but was clumsily failing to make the point that they seem to be narrated from the Harry's POV, told as he recalled witnessing them. That's why there's no inconsistency in his not being mentioned along with Hermione. He remembered seeing her, just as he remembered being chased up a tree. And it's true that > we can't tell how *Harry* sees these memories, but it's quite clear > that *Snape* can see both Harry and the dog. Eloise: Err, I believe that's the case, but I don't think it's spelled out. Carol: > In any case, I think the Legilimency spell works like the Pensieve in > making the memories appear in an objective visible form, but not, of > course, a three-dimensional one that can be entered. Even a Legilimens > like Voldemort or Dumbledore would see them in this form, not from the > subjective viewpoint of the person remembering. As Snape tells us, > Legilimency is not mind-reading. The Legilimens doesn't know the > person's thoughts; he only sees the memories in a form that he can > interpret. And that would include seeing the person whose memory is > being viewed in recognizable form, whether that person is Snape or > Harry. Eloise: And that, basically is what I suggested. If you're viewing someone else's memory, you don't witness it from within the viewpoint of the person whose memory you are viewing. The whole point of pointing out that our description of Harry's memories, *as remembered by Harry as they were being summoned from him* and *not* as witnessed by Snape (as we don't have an account of them from his viewpoint)was to support that view and I'm completely flummoxed as to how I seem to keep being called as a witness for the opposition. (The Hermione memory is an odd exception and would probably > confuse Voldemort if he were to see it!) Eloise: The way I read it, it's completely consistent and just goes to highlight the fact that Harry isn't remembering *his own* memories from what I would call a third person viewpoint, which as someone pointed out earlier in the thread would be a rather odd thing to do. Just to flog that horse a bit more, how Harry witnesses his own memories tell us nothing about how Snape witnesses Harry's memories, which I assume (although we are not told) is the same way as you assume he witnesses them, as a completely outside observer. ~Eloise From snow15145 at yahoo.com Sat Dec 4 16:36:31 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 16:36:31 -0000 Subject: Harry's Protection (was Re: Questions) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119247 Kneasy: A different take to mine, but that's not important - working up a theory that you're happy with and are willing to defend is. At least we seem to agree that it's about life or some aspect of it, the struggle to survive and thrive from me, the consequences (welcome and unwelcome) of immortality from snow. Good. Maybe with a bit of luck a crowd will gather and we can start smiting the opposition hip and thigh. Snow: And that's what it's all about. Appreciating other posters opinions whether you totally agree with them or not. It's always good to look at a different view of what you initially thought something meant. I liked your view of the studies at the Department of Mysteries as Dumbledore described them: Kneasy previously: "More wonderful and more terrible than Death (the Death Chamber), than human intelligence (the brain tank), than the forces of nature (the planetary system)." Throw in the paradoxes of Time as another make-weight mystery. Snow: I was at once motivated to look at this passage yet again and what I found was the suggestion that I had offered of there being more than one issue in the locked room. The force and the power are not the same thing. Kneasy: Dunno about you, but I've never considered that immortality should be considered as a boon, it's more of a curse IMO. Many folk tales look at it the same way. Not only is there the eventual dreadful dreariness of one damn day after another, stretching out to eternity, there's also the snag that although you're immortal, that doesn't guarantee that you'll stay young. By and large, I'd go along with your contention that to live forever, to know everything, would be a real frost. Nothing new - ever. Terminal ennui and perpetual boredom, something that I get hints of when looking at the TV schedules. However, for the time being I'll stick with life and/or life force in it's more conventional form as my pick. To do otherwise would argue that Harry (who possesses this power) is immortal himself. Hmm. A biologist/geneticist can comfortably argue that our DNA *is* immortal, having being passed down more or less unchanged from pre-history. (It doesn't matter in this case that you and I are eventually odds on to turn up our toes, which would knock immortality on the head, 'cos we're still alive *now* - and the best description of an immortal is someone who isn't dead *yet*.) But is JKR au fait with biological thinking? Probably not. Snow: That's the whole issue in a nutshell Harry does not possess the force that is contained in the room, he possesses the power that is held within that same room. They are two separate issues. Jo makes it appear to be one in the same by using synonyms like force and power also the words contained and held. I see this as the force that is contained in the room is protected by the power that is held there. We have always assumed that only one thing resides in the locked room but since I have noticed the precise wording I'm leaning towards this new thought. As far as immortality being the force, I would think it to be the only thing that was not openly studied at the DOM. If the DOM studies time as in time-turner travel, the planets like the centaurs, brains and their intelligence why would they leave out one of the most intriguing phenomena; immortality. Of course immortality studies would have to be well guarded and protected with a power beyond any ordinary protection. That's where Harry's type of power comes into play. It is purely self-sacrificing each time Harry attempts to protect someone or something. Harry has no regard for his own safety because he cares so deeply. Harry has gone as far as to protect strangers like Gabriel (Fleur's little sister) and his cousin Dudley, who just hit him in the head, from dementors. I think it would be safe to say that he would protect Snape if the opportunity arose. I don't think Harry can help himself from running to the rescue, he doesn't stop to think, he just reacts even to save someone that he doesn't know or isn't particularly fond of. That is truely saying something for Harry's character. Snow From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Sat Dec 4 16:52:17 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 16:52:17 -0000 Subject: The Darkness Within In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119248 > > Neri responded: > > >Briefly, I suggest that LV agreed to become mortal again only if he'd > also gain Harry's protection. With the blood trick he indeed managed > to get this protection for himself, but by sharing blood with Harry, > he is now vulnerable to Harry, exactly in the same way that Harry is > vulnerable to him. So LV is now mortal, but protected against > everybody except Harry. This explains DD's gleam of triumph: he > realized that LV again made the prophecy come true by his own actions. > This also explains why DD didn't try to kill LV in the MoM ? he > believes that LV is protected against anybody except Harry. > > Carol again: > But LV states specifically that he's mortal. Neri: I think he IS mortal, but well protected. There's a difference between being immortal and well protected. > Carol: > He also seems to think > that Dumbledore could have killed him in the MoM (whether he could > have or not, I don't know, but I don't think he could have). Neri: I'm not sure what LV thinks when he says "you do not seek to kill me, Dumbledore. Above such brutality?" It could be that he thinks DD can kill him and wonders why he doesn't try, or he thinks DD can't kill him (which fits with his bravado manner during the battle) but wonders if DD has realized this. > Carol: > So I don't think that Voldemort is deliberately making himself > killable only by Harry, whether that's the effect of the "blood trick" > or not. Neri: Assuming my theory is correct, I'm not sure if LV has realized at all that he made himself killable only by Harry. It could be that he never understood that part of the blood magic. It is also possible that he understood it even before his resurrection, but thought that he is going to kill Harry in the graveyard anyway, so there's nothing to worry about. > Carol: > For one thing, he still doesn't know the details of the > Prophecy, either at this time or later. But he does know enough to > suspect that Harry is "the one with the power," and it makes no sense > at all (to me) that he would deliberately make himself vulnerable to > the one person who can kill or destroy him. Neri: We know that LV knows that Harry is "the one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord", but he doesn't know the parts about "mark him as equal" and "and either must die by the hand of the other". As I wrote, we can assume that LV doesn't understand he made himself vulnerable to Harry, or that he does but he planed to kill Harry immediately after using his blood. Either possibility answers your question. It is precisely the prophecy that makes me think I'm right in this. If I'm right, then this would be the second time that LV fulfilled the prophecy by his own attempt to thwart it. I suspect this is a nice theme that JKR uses to handle the paradox between fate and free will. This also explains why DD is so adamant about preventing LV from getting the rest of the prophecy. > Carol: > Also, as I read the GoF scene, the first step is to get his body back; > the next step is to pursue immortality *again* by taking whatever > steps he took before to become sufficiently immortal to survive an AK. > Maybe nightly mini-doses of Nagini venom or something? Neri: >From LV words it is not clear if he is going to "pursue immortality again" tomorrow morning or in two years, once he clears his desk of this unfinished business of taking over the WW. I read "I would settle for my body and powers" more like the second option. > > Carol, who thinks she understands how he became "immortal" in the > first place but is confused because he seems to think he has lost that > power (despite having survived the AK) and openly admits as much to > the DEs. Neri: He says he had lost all his powers except for the ability to possess others. But he WAS still immortal. This is also what makes me think that the power to possess and his immortality are almost the same thing. In any case, both he and DD said that as Vapormort he was immortal, so I think we can trust this part. > Carol: > If he's mortal, can't a > renegade DE kill him? And why trust his untrustworthy disciples with > that knowledge? Neri: This is another evidence that he believes he is now very well protected. > Carol: > The only thing I can think of is that a DE or Dumbledore (if he'd > lower himself to use an AK) could destroy Voldemort's current body, > just as the first one was destroyed, but only Harry can permanently > vanquish and destroy his spirit? If so, I don't think *Voldemort* > knows this, but Dumbledore might. Which would certainly answer the > question JKR asked her fans about why Dumbledore didn't try to kill > Voldemort at the MoM. Neri: This theory doesn't fit very well with what happened in the graveyard. LV said he was ready to become mortal again, and he used Harry's blood, which according to the gleam in DD's eyes was some kind of a blunder. All these suggest that it is now both LV's body and spirit that are killable. > > Carol, who did go back and review Neri's elaborate theory, but thinks > that a simpler answer is needed here. Neri: I'd love to find a simpler theory, but it would not be easy, considering all the many things that must be explained. However, I don't think my theory is THAT elaborate. The original, admittedly long post was mostly devoted to the possible link between LV and Snape. However,the prophecy/mortality/protection part was explained in just a few paragraphs. This is not too much considering we are talking about the heart of the main mystery. I think it was Einstein who said something like "one should strive to make things as simple as possible, but not simpler than that." Neri From snow15145 at yahoo.com Sat Dec 4 17:06:29 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 17:06:29 -0000 Subject: Harry's Protection (was Re: Questions) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119249 Jen Reese snipped: To me, self-sacrifice must be for a greater or higher purpose to be something other than killing yourself. I'm not trying to sound tacky there, but do you know what I mean? True, pure self-sacrifice is about Love in the end. Snow: I guess in the end it is about Love but Harry feels little love when he attempts to save Gabriel or Dudley, it is more like a reaction to a situation. There is no time for Harry to think if he should or shouldn't save either one of these people, yet he does. It could be a greater love than even Harry understands that he possesses, somewhat unconditional. Jen: And then there's the question of how Harry came to have this power and Voldemort not at all. Did Voldemort reject this power in his quest for immortality or never have it to begin with? We know he wasn't born evil, he must have possessed this power in *some* small quantity at least. Snow: According to the prophecy, Harry was born with the `power' to vanquish the dark lord. Harry already had this power but it may have become reinforced with his mother's protection. As Harry grows and questions his own behavior, after the fact, he may learn how to control this power to its eventual necessity to defeat Voldemort. I don't believe we know enough about Voldemort's past to make an actual assumption of why. Some people take advantage of their past as an excuse for their present, so it may be with Voldemort. Harry had similar circumstances to Tom Riddle but Harry has not condemned anyone for his more than neglected childhood like Tom Riddle chose to do with his father's denial. Tom chose to accentuate the negative, which made him bitter whereas Harry chose to see his glass as half- full. Snow From foxmoth at qnet.com Sat Dec 4 17:09:46 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 17:09:46 -0000 Subject: Snape and Lupin's Character Arcs (was: Lupin's Char Arc) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119250 Alla: > By the way, I did not say that Snape was not a nice guy. You can be not nice, but a good person. I don't believe that Snape is a GOOD guy. I believe that he is a bad person, fighting on the side of good. That is why I think he will redeem himself att he end (as if he did not redeem himself yet). Pippin: I think that Snape has redeemed himself already, Harry just doesn't realize it. You can be a good person and not do well with children. Likewise, Lupin has fallen into evil (IMO) and Harry doesn't realize that either. You can be a bad person and relate very well to children. Ginny adored Riddle. I don't think it would be in character for either Snape or Lupin to evolve into solid effective father-figures. I think a lot of readers yearn for that, if only because Harry needs one so badly. But Harry's character arc is the important one, and his journey so far has been to grow up and overcome the absence of a father, not to find a replacement for him. What Harry has to do in both Snape and Lupin's case, and the reason why, IMO, they are still in the story, is to grow up. He needs to judge people by a more objective standard than how well they treat him and his friends. It's a great big world out there and being nice to Gyffindors is not the definition of goodness. Pippin From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Sat Dec 4 17:43:31 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 17:43:31 -0000 Subject: Harry's Protection (was Re: Questions) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119251 > Kneasy wrote: > However, for the time being I'll stick with life and/or life force in > it's more conventional form as my pick. Neri: The difficulty I see with your theory is that DD said "that power took you to save Sirius tonight". So if it is some kind of a life force, then it is a pretty altruistic life force. This aspect of the mysterious power is further established by the fact that, when the power was finally rising within Harry and kicking Voldy out, it was when Harry was ready to die if he takes Voldy with him, and when he thinks that "he'll see Sirius again". This suggests that the mysterious power indeed opposes Death, but in a subtler way than a simple life force. More than it is "Life", it is "The Willingness to Die for What's Right" (if you can express this in a single word). Neri From Vivamus at TaprootTech.com Sat Dec 4 18:15:01 2004 From: Vivamus at TaprootTech.com (Vivamus) Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2004 13:15:01 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Neville's choice (was: ghosts, ...etc... - Minor Point) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041204131565.SM01064@devbox> No: HPFGUIDX 119252 > bboyminn: > > Ask yourself this, with his definite overriding lack of > selfconfidence, what are the odds that Neville choose 'not > Gryffindor'? > > I would speculate that it would be possible for Neville to > argue with the Hat and say 'I'm not good enough for > Gryffindor, I should be in Hufflepuff'. I furthur speculate > that the Hat overrode Neville's objections, and placed him in > Gryffindor anyway, seeing in him things that were impossible > in that moment for Neville to see in himself. > > Yes, is all speculation, but if we can speculate, with some > foundation, that the Sorting Hat considers a students choice, > isn't it reasonable that the Hat would disregard a student's > choice when it knows that choice goes against the student's > true nature? Vivamus: I would agree that it is reasonable, but so is the SH going entirely on the student's choice. JKR has not given us enough information to lean too far in either direction, I think, except that she *has* shown us that Harry's choice was respected by the hat, AND that Harry also fit the qualifications for the hat. To support your contention that the hat really is in control, it was only after the hat essentially said to Harry, "you could be in all four houses, so where should I put you?" that Harry started thinking, "not Slytherin". I would disagree that Neville would ever say that he is not good enough for Gryffindor. I think that is a matter of family pride, and I suspect his grandmother in particular would be disappointed if he weren't put there. I further suspect he would know this. Vivamus From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Sat Dec 4 18:15:49 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 18:15:49 -0000 Subject: werewolf vs animagus In-Reply-To: <20041204032323.52571.qmail@web53103.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119253 > Juli wrote: > > So my question is: If Remus' and Sirius' jaws are > clenched together it means that Remus is biting > Sirius, right? Then why didn't Sirius became a > werewolf? Neri: PoA, Ch. 18: "They couldn't keep me company as humans, so they kept me company as animals," said Lupin. "A werewolf is only a danger to people." From foxmoth at qnet.com Sat Dec 4 18:22:38 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 18:22:38 -0000 Subject: Detached?Lupin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119254 > Pippin: > > We don't? > > Trying to kill Peter was extremist activity, at least Harry > > thought so. > > Jen: We differ here. Murder is legally and morally wrong. Extremist connotates activites which are highly unusual and radical in nature. Committing murder can be a part of an extremist activity, but it isn't extremist in and of itself. Otherwise we would see far fewer murders in the world and far more evil overlords.< > Harry indeed thought Lupin & Sirius were wrong to murder Pettigrew, and he didn't want to see them become "murderers" because of him. Harry didn't appear to equate their potential crime with choosing a lifetime of service to Voldemort. < Pippin: But Sirius did, in GoF. "I'll say this for Moody, though, he never killed if he could help it. Always brought people in alive where possible. He was tough, but he never descended to the level of the Death Eaters." > > Pippin: > > Failing to inform on Sirius was abetting someone whom he believed had engaged in pure blood ideology, Muggle torture and affiliation with people engaging in nefarious activities. > > > > Lupin's job was more important to him than Harry's skin, and if that wasn't choosing power over love, what is?<< > > Jen: That's Lupin's assessment of the situation, yes. Harry didn't seem to view it that way, nor did Dumbledore. Fudge was told by Snape that the Trio was consorting with a 'murderer and werewolf,' implicating Lupin by association, but nothing comes of it. < Pippin: According to Lupin, Dumbledore managed to persuade Fudge that Lupin was trying to save the children's lives when he went to the shack. But that doesn't mean Dumbledore didn't view Lupin's failure to tell him that Sirius was an animagus as moral cowardice. Dumbledore may believe that Lupin was genuinely remorseful over what he had done, and deserved a chance to make up for it. He's big on second chances, after all. Harry doesn't see Lupin's actions as reprehensible because he's thirteen years old, and according to his schoolboy's grasp of morality, you don't rat out your peers, no matter what. He was ready to drop Hermione for telling McGonagall about the Firebolt, even though he knew she'd done it because she was concerned for his life. I would expect Harry's understanding to shift as he grows older. This theme is brought out in OOP, where Sirius tries to explain to Fred and George that they aren't in the Order because they don't understand that there are more important things than showing loyalty to Dad. There aren't a whole bunch of adults who know what Lupin did, only Dumbledore, Sirius and Snape -- Fudge couldn't have been told or the Ministry would have known that Sirius was an animagus. What Dumbledore thought we don't know, but he didn't fight for Lupin's position the way he fought for Hagrid's. He may have decided that Lupin is okay to be an Order member, but wasn't ready to be a Hogwarts teacher, just as he seems to feel Snape is okay to be a Hogwarts teacher but not ready to teach DADA. Sirius needed Lupin to forgive him for thinking that Lupin had been the spy--it would have been churlish to withhold forgiveness from Lupin in return. Now he's dead, so we won't have to deal with his disillusionment. We don't know about Snape's current attitude towards Lupin, since IIRC they don't interact in OOP. But he was definitely unreconciled at the end of PoA. Pippin From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Dec 4 18:58:38 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 18:58:38 -0000 Subject: Snape and Lupin's Character Arcs (was: Lupin's Char Arc) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119255 boyd wrote (re Snape): > > By mentor I mean senior partner. Not confidante. Not buddy. Not father. Trainer? Yes. Imparter of knowledge? Yes. Protector? That, too. > If you want someone to give warm fuzzies to Harry, I'd look for > Ginny/Luna/Hermione/Ron/Tonks. Any of them would be better emotional > supporters, although he hasn't sought much of that yet.... > > And given that list of possible emotional supporters, who needs Lupin anymore? Just seeing him become less distant isn't enough of a payoff to keep him around, Basically, that crew all clearly has developing left to do, whereas I fear Remus to be a character completed. Carol notes: I'm enjoying this thread and essentially agree with Boyd about the eventual need for an alliance between Snape and Harry, which will most likely occur in Book 7 rather than Book 6. That doesn't eliminate the possibility of Lupin as a sort of interim mentor, however. I can't think of anyone else who can fill Harry in on the backstory of MWPP. Snape isn't going to do it, at least not in a way Harry can appreciate. I agree that Lupin may well be another casualty, but I think his loss will be more significant if he performs the role of mentor first: another father figure that Harry gains and loses. (All the more reason to turn to Snape, whom he thinks he won't grieve for if he loses him??) At any rate, FWIW, we have Trelawney's prediction from the Christmas luncheon in PoA: "I have seen that poor Professor Lupin will not be with us for very long. He seems aware himself that his time is short. . . ." (Am. ed. 229). Dumbledore responds that he doubts Lupin is in any *immediate* danger--which of course does not preclude mortal peril or worse in Book 6 or 7. Carol, noting in surprise that Snape is not the only character who addresses Dumbledore as "Headmaster": Trelawney does it, too (PoA Am. ed. 228) From carolynwhite2 at aol.com Sat Dec 4 19:04:48 2004 From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (carolynwhite2) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 19:04:48 -0000 Subject: Harry's Protection (was Re: Questions) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119256 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nkafkafi" wrote: > This aspect of the mysterious power is further established by the fact that, when the power was finally rising within Harry and kicking Voldy out, it was when Harry was ready to die if he takes Voldy with him, and when he thinks that "he'll see Sirius again". > > This suggests that the mysterious power indeed opposes Death, but in a subtler way than a simple life force. More than it is "Life", it is "The Willingness to Die for What's Right" (if you can express this in a single word). > Carolyn: Sorry, Neri, I don't agree it had anything to do with dying for 'what is Right', or that it had anything to do with consciously trying to take Voldy with him. Harry wished Dumbledore would kill him and Voldy purely and simply because at that point he was in unendurable pain, no more, no less. In this extremis, he (quite sensibly) just wanted to die, and the desire carried with it the added bonus, to him, that at least he would be with Sirius. There are no false heroics involved. If you like, it is a version of the euthanasia argument - the individual's right to choose to die if life seems not worth living. For reasons we don't yet fully understand (but Dumbledore probably does), Voldy can't tolerate the effect of someone gratefully embracing the idea of death, and it drives him away. Personally, I find it a tediously contrived moment. Surely numerous people/creatures that Voldemort has possessed have wished they could die than go on enduring the pain of his presence? Just like many people have probably sacrificed themselves for love, as Lily did to protect Harry. It creaks as a plot device, and leads me to think that there is something a lot more mechanical going on. According to JKR herself (Edinburgh chat), Dumbledore certainly knows a lot more than he's telling. Carolyn From yswahl at stis.net Sat Dec 4 19:18:14 2004 From: yswahl at stis.net (samnanya) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 19:18:14 -0000 Subject: Surprise me, dammit !!!!! Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119257 For all the talk about Harry will/wont die, Neville will/wont die, this ship or that ship HAS!TO!HAPPEN!, Snape ("Professor Snape, Harry") is a DE, vampire, cross dresser, or good guy, Lupin is ESE! , a really good guy who cant POSSIBLY be evil, a tame werewolf, a mutated yeti, ..... all of this ........ Well, no one besides jkr is sure of anything at this point , and all the "predictions" posted here are merely hopes dreams and prejudices with little to support that these events MUST occur. Opinions are boring and argumentative, and are getting staler by the minute. About a thousand or so posts were devoted to shrill arguments about Good!Snape Bad!Snape to the point that it has turned into a Bush!Kerry debate and is just irritating. It should have been obvious by now that no one's mind would be ever changed on this matter. The H/H, H/R et all shippers will NEVER ever agree since there is rock solid canon supporting EACH of them (even Ginny/Squid). And once again, once a reader or poster has made up their mind, the issue is closed. And Dumbledore has been buried so many times by now that as Harry says to Drecko Malfooey "funny i'm still walkin' around!"....... Boring... boring.... boring What is far more interesting (to me at least) is plotting. What SUPRISES do you think JKR has in store for us frantic desperate readers? What plot twists can bring the series to a memorable and satisfying conclusion? What lessons does JKR want to teach her readers by the actions of the characters in the potterverse? Remember, there has to be at least SOME canon to support a suprise, otherwise you have a deux ex machina and everyone tosses the book against the wall.... (i.e. End of book 7 --- and Harry woke up and it was all a dream told to him by his scar) And the thing about suprises, if they are obvious they are not suprises. Also, and this is important here ..... THEY DONT HAVE TO HAPPEN !!! THEY JUST CANT BE DISMISSED OUT OF HAND. Dont tell me that Lupin CANT POSSIBLY be evil since he reminds you of your ninth grade teacher and HE was a good guy, or whatever built in opinion you have based on your life experience .... So..... what SUPRISES do YOU think might happen? Here is my not so short list ...... without canon since the odds are that few people will have even gotten this far let alone actually resond to it. I will of course provide it upon request or interest...... DON'T BE SUPRISED IF ........... 1. Draco Malfoy turns out to be the HBP (DM!HBP Theory) --------------------------------------------------------- I had proposed this several months ago and it was promptly ignored with rather feeble arguments why this CANNOT be so. But dont rule it out! We know that Narcissa is pure blood, but precious little is known about Lucius' background. What a helluva plot twist it would be if Lucius is not who he claims to be. Besides Trevor, no other character comes close to having the suprise factor that this one would. If you disagree, imagine if you were writing HPatHBP and provide a more interesting choice! 2. Luna Lovegood will be a Major Major part of Harry's life in HBP, replacing Hermione for most of Book 6 ------------------------------------------------------------------ Luna's dad will be killed by Goyle (with or without LV) within three chapters of the book because the Quibbler published the interview that led to Harry's redemption and the ruination of his plan to stay hidden until he got the prophecy. The destruction of the Quibbler as a dissenting voice will be a powerful message to the WW that anyone who goes up against the Dark Lord will pay a dreadful price. So, Mr. Lovegood is a goner. Count on it. Because her dad will die, and because she has nowhere else to go, she will end up on Privet Drive and will be the reason that Harry will leave there early. Harry offered to help her find her things twice and she will go to him for help. Harry will not refuse. I cant imagine that the Dursleys would tolerate a GIRL in the house under any circumstances (I would love to see Petunia's reaction to Luna...) and will be told never to return to Privet Drive again. I have much much more on this, but i am not going to waste space on it now. 3. The Joke Shop & then Knockturn Alley will be major settings in HBP --------------------------------------------------------------------- So where does Harry (with or without Luna, if you dont buy into #2) go? To Fred and George. They are the new generation James and Sirius so they are where Harry will feel most comfortable. If you read the last chapter of OOP you will sense that Harry didnt feel comfortable with ANYONE he formally felt comfortable with -- not DD, Hermione or Ron, Hagrid. So where else would he go ? He lied to Molly and Hagrid and Ron and Hermione dont REALLY know what he went through. A return to Grimauld Place is probably premature (unless you are into elfacide) The Joke Shop is probably the safest place for Harry in his condition. As far as Knockturn Alley, it would be an interesting destination to Harry on the run. Borgin and Burkes was in the second movie, and I just have a hunch that was the scene that JKR didnt want cut because it will play a big role in the future. There are also some interesting magical objects there that would be useful when on the run (hand of glory, the "staring glass eye" -- perhaps like Moody's magical one?). 4.Ginny is unhinged in time and is not who (or what) she seems to be -------------------------------------------------------------------- Ginny is the one real wild card in the series. She has a real interest in time travel and eggs and was as fascinaed by the Time Room as Harry was by the veil. There is also a ton of egg symbolism throughout all the books. I would not be at all suprised if she turns out to be a reincarnation or a visitor from the past. It is also not an accident that she was the one that Riddle occupied. Ginny is the character I most expect to be totally different than what our impressions of her are until now. I dont know how but I know that she will be. 5. Snape will disappear & Hermione will be vital to the art of potions (though she wont be a teacher yet) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Besides Hermione, who else has been shown to be a competent potions master? Snape has to at least appear to be disloyal to the order for his character to be a non caricature... ( To all you Snape lovers, get a life! This is my opinion, just dont rule out the possibility that Snape is a traitor to the order, at least temporarily) Hermione has demonstrated that she has an outstanding grasp of potions 6. The Marauders Map will be revealed to have powerful dark magic and will be the key to the invasion of Hogwarts ---------------------------------------------------------------------- So far it is all fun and games, but read POA very carefully for some of its more scarier properties. and dont forget that Peter Pettigrew was one of the authors (as was lupin) 8. Even if DD dies, his memories will be available to Harry in his pensieve - so someone ELSE will die or betray the order who is more important to the balance of power between the order and the dark lord ---------------------------------------------------------------------- My bet is on Lupin --- I am not convinced that his hands are entirely clean in the death of Sirius --- and with his knowledge of the Marauders map and dementors, his betrayal will be that much more damaging. 9. Why Harry lived & why Voldemort didnt die are the keys to unlocking how the series ends (Hagrid as Yogi Berra) --------------------------------------------------------------------- I am saving this for my next post...... There are a lot of strange quotes from dumbledore in the prophecy chapter as well as comments by Hagrid in the first book that raise a lot of interesting questions about Harry and the dark lord ..... Hagrid's quotes are also quite interesting and double edged..... Harry's self sacrificing tendencies are critical 10. The end of Hogwarts will be the biggest suprise the end of the series ------------------------------------------------------------------- Too much hidden canon to quote here. I just cant imagine JKR wanting to continue this after the series concludes. It will be time to move on. She will have twelve children and live a long life.... oops, that was Trelawney speaking So, happy plotting to you all..... From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Dec 4 19:26:50 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 19:26:50 -0000 Subject: Detached?Lupin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119258 Casey wrote: > I love Lupin and don't see him as ESE. Still, I was very > disturbed by the fact that everyone was looking for this known > murderer yet Lupin kept important information about a possible way to > capture him quiet. Lupin knew, like the rest, that Black would > probably try to find Harry and still he never gave Dumbledore, or > anyone, the information that Black was an animagis (sp?). Why? What > could be served by keeping that bit of information a secret. Why put > Harry at more risk than he had to? What better way to prove to the > others that he, a werewolf, was to be trusted? Instead he kept his > knowledge to himself putting, not only Harry, but every other > student at risk. Carol notes: Not to mention that he knew that Black could get into Hogwarts through secret passages and could well be hiding in the Shrieking Shack. Note that while he kept the confiscated Marauder's Map, he didn't turn it in to Dumbledore. Carol, who sees Lupin as someone who knows the right thing to do but is generally too weak to do it From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Dec 4 19:48:53 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 19:48:53 -0000 Subject: Trusting characters Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: <3def328f04120305345f227679@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119259 Kizor wrote: > > Fourth: We don't know if a person Apparating can bring another person who can't Apparate with him. > > > > Patrick: > I think we can safely say you can't do that. Why else would Mr. > Weasley taken them all to a Portkey for the Quidditch match? Mr. > Weasley surely would have preferred to apparate like Bill and Charley (Percy? Twins? I forget) did. > > -- Patrick Carol notes: FWIW, Percy is showing off his newly acquired apparating ability in GoF. The Twins are still sixteen and therefore underage, an important point later when they try to cross the age line. They don't have their apparating license yet, so Mr. Weasley uses the portkey to transport them as well as HRH and Ginny. In OoP, it's the Twins' turn to show off their apparating skills--like accidentally landing on Ron's knee in 12 Grimmauld Place. Carol, who notes that Voldemort did apparate with Bellatrix in OoP, but maybe that was a special case (and certainly easier than apparating with six kids) Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Dec 4 20:11:06 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 20:11:06 -0000 Subject: Slytherin House again. Was: Re: Problem with OotP? (was: Pampering) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119260 > Potioncat wrote : > "We should be see talented students working hard and doing what they > need to do to be successful. Some of course would be cheating to get > good marks and some would be studying. Not everyone would be bright, > but everyone should be driven to succeed within their abilities." > > Del replied: > We've seen those things in non-Slytherin students, but not in > Slytherin ones yet. I can of course imagine that it's only because > Harry never runs into those hard-working Slytherins. I really hope > we'll get to meet at least one of them in HBP, maybe one that did very well in his OWLs ? Carol notes: Well, there's Severus Snape, who presumably scored very high on that DADA OWL since he clearly knew the subject in great detail. I imagine he did equally well in Potions. And there's Barty Jr. Admittedly, we don't know for sure that he was a Slytherin, though as a pureblood who later showed extreme cunning, he may well have been. At any rate, we know he received twelve OWLs, evidently the one and only accomplishment his father ever expressed pride in. So either Barty is a studious Slytherin or a fallen Ravenclaw--either way a slight deviation from the Slytherin stereotype. Possibly Quirrell, whom Hagrid credits with having a brilliant mind before he encounterd the hag and the vampires, was a Slytherin as well though of course Hagrid's view of the facts is thoroughly distorted. And for the current generation, there's Theo Nott, who is ostensibly if noncanonically more intelligent than Draco and not part of his gang despite a brief appearance together in OoP. Assuming that Harry gets into NEWT Potions, he should have his chance to become acquainted with Theo in HBP. And as Del noted, Draco seems to be a pretty good student, and not just because of Snape's favoritism. We never see him messing up in Potions (other than pretending he can't cut up his own roots)--no melted cauldrons or Potions that turn out orange when they ought to be green--so more than likely, he earned some OWLs, too. Regarding the Slytherins' views of other houses, it strikes me that Draco's view of Hufflepuff is similar to Ron's (or was it Hagrid who called them "duffers"?) and his view of Ravenclaw as the second-best house is similar to Hermione's. Carol, very much hoping that Theo will be an important character in HBP From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Sat Dec 4 19:32:34 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2004 11:32:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: werewolf vs animagus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041204193234.97999.qmail@web53103.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119261 > > Juli earlier: > > > > > So my question is: If Remus' and Sirius' jaws are > > clenched together it means that Remus is biting > > Sirius, right? Then why didn't Sirius became a > > werewolf? > > Neri: > > PoA, Ch. 18: > "They couldn't keep me company as humans, so they > kept me company as > animals," said Lupin. "A werewolf is only a danger > to people." Juli again: Thanks for the quote Neri, but my conclussion with that statement is that a werewolf doesn't attack animals, but he did bit Padfoot, so because Sirius was in his animagus form he didn't transform? From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Dec 4 20:31:08 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 20:31:08 -0000 Subject: Reputations (was Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119262 Finwitch wrote: > > Yes. What did Hermione say: "Dumbledore trusts him and if we can't > trust Dumbledore, we can trust no one". > > I think there's another point, one none of the kids makes. (Though > Harry may *act* it). I think Albus Dumbledore, Sirius Black etc. can > indeed be trusted - to some extent - BUT I don't know if I were ready > to trust anyone to tell me who to trust, that I'd trust someone just > because someone else does... they all are capable of erring, after > all. AND Snape may well be trustworthy to *Dumbledore* but not to > Harry. (So er - if Dumbledore were to die, Snape's not to be > trusted...) Carol responds: Not necessarily. If Dumbledore's trust in Snape is based on his knowledge that Snape is a genuine enemy of Voldemort, and if Snape knows that Harry is "the one" who can defeat Voldemort, then it is in Snape's best interests to keep Harry alive (as he has been trying to do since SS/PS), regardless of whether Dumbledore lives or dies. Carol From silviaanthoi at tiscali.it Sat Dec 4 20:15:47 2004 From: silviaanthoi at tiscali.it (anthoinedietrich) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 20:15:47 -0000 Subject: Surprise me, dammit !!!!! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119263 samnanya: (snip) > DON'T BE SUPRISED IF ........... (snip some interesting points) > 4.Ginny is unhinged in time and is not who (or what) she seems to be > ------------------------------------------------------------------- - > Ginny is the one real wild card in the series. She has a real interest > in time travel and eggs and was as fascinaed by the Time Room as Harry > was by the veil. There is also a ton of egg symbolism throughout all > the books. Could you explain what you mean by this? I have to admit the only egg symbolism I recall is the wailing egg in the triwizard tournament. I find Ginny a really interesting carachter who has developed a lot throughout the books and I'd like her to play a major and unexpected role, but I've never noticed either egg symbolism or time-travel connections with her. samnanya: > I would not be at all suprised if she turns out to be a reincarnation > or a visitor from the past. Could you expand on this too? > It is also not an accident that she was > the one that Riddle occupied. Ginny is the character I most expect to > be totally different than what our impressions of her are until now. I hope you're right that she will surprise us, but I definitly wouldn't like her to be evil. Silvia on her very first post and a bit troubled with snipping From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Sat Dec 4 20:43:17 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 20:43:17 -0000 Subject: Harry's Protection (was Re: Questions) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119264 > Carolyn: > Sorry, Neri, I don't agree it had anything to do with dying for 'what > is Right', or that it had anything to do with consciously trying to > take Voldy with him. > > Harry wished Dumbledore would kill him and Voldy purely and simply > because at that point he was in unendurable pain, no more, no less. > In this extremis, he (quite sensibly) just wanted to die, and the > desire carried with it the added bonus, to him, that at least he > would be with Sirius. There are no false heroics involved. > Neri: It could be Harry's willingness to die that did the job, or it could be his thought about seeing Sirius again, or it could be both. It is hard to tell. However, DD saying "that power took you to save Sirius tonight" suggests that heroics (or at any rate something more altruistic than just the will to live) is involved. > If you like, it is a version of the euthanasia argument - the > individual's right to choose to die if life seems not worth living. > For reasons we don't yet fully understand (but Dumbledore probably > does), Voldy can't tolerate the effect of someone gratefully > embracing the idea of death, and it drives him away. Neri: Yes, this was my point. The power is more about "gratefully embracing the idea of death" than "Life". However, if there is someone in the books who embraces the idea of death, it is DD, who views death as "the next great adventure". So why can't DD bit Voldy by himself? Why is Harry "The One"? An answer might be that DD has lived 150 years and has reached that phase when death is merely an adventure. He won't be sacrificing much by dying. Harry is a youngster with his future well before him, so for him dying is much more of a sacrifice, and therefore perhaps much more powerful. Which leads us to the question: what is the relation between this power and Lily's Ancient Magic? > > Personally, I find it a tediously contrived moment. Surely numerous > people/creatures that Voldemort has possessed have wished they could > die than go on enduring the pain of his presence? Just like many > people have probably sacrificed themselves for love, as Lily did to > protect Harry. > > It creaks as a plot device, and leads me to think that there is > something a lot more mechanical going on. According to JKR herself > (Edinburgh chat), Dumbledore certainly knows a lot more than he's > telling. > Neri: Yes, I personally believe (and wrote here several times) that this power is a mechanical plot device. But it also symbolizes something. The "death room" contains a magical device that symbolizes Death. IMO the locked room contains a magical power that symbolizes X. I suspect that X is something that opposes "Death", but it doesn't look like it is simply "Life". Neri From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Dec 4 20:56:50 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 20:56:50 -0000 Subject: Fat Friar (was ghosts, magicians and babies was Re: Questions In-Reply-To: <20041202192729.42359.qmail@web53109.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119265 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Juli wrote: > > > > Elanor Pam wrote: > > > The Fat Friar was a friar - but he was also a wizard (well, he's HufflePuff's ghost, so I assume he was). > > > > Potioncat responded: > > How did he become both? According to JKR the ghosts were in the house they now haunt. If FF was at Hogwarts from 11--17, when did he go to the monestary?> > > Juli: What if instead of being a wizard and a friar he was just a wizard who by some reason got the nickname of fat friar? > > Juli Carol notes: But isn't there a lso a pportrait of some monks in Hogwarts? Presumably they were wizards as well, probably at a time when the separation between the MW and the WW hadn't become final. I'm pretty sure that the Fat Friar was a Hufflepuff (after all, he's that house's resident ghost) who became a real friar at around age eighteen, but at his death decided that the best years of his life were at Hogwarts, so that's where he returned after death. I really don't see any contradiction between being a wizard and being a friar in the *early* Middle Ages. Even as late as the fourteenth century, when witch-burning was in full swing, he could have been known in the MW for performing "miracles" instead of magic. Carol From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Sat Dec 4 21:08:59 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 21:08:59 -0000 Subject: werewolf vs animagus In-Reply-To: <20041204193234.97999.qmail@web53103.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119266 > > Neri: > > > > PoA, Ch. 18: > > "They couldn't keep me company as humans, so they > > kept me company as > > animals," said Lupin. "A werewolf is only a danger > > to people." > > Juli again: > > Thanks for the quote Neri, but my conclussion with > that statement is that a werewolf doesn't attack > animals, but he did bit Padfoot, so because Sirius was > in his animagus form he didn't transform? Neri: Your conclusion is one possible interpretation of Lupin's statement, but another possible interpretation is that even if a werewolf bites an animal, this animal doesn't become a werewolf. This sounds to me more probable. I mean, have you ever heard about a dog werewolf or a rat werewolf? Speaking OT, this reminds me that there's a story by Le-Guin about a young she-wolf who is happily married to this handsome wolf and they have cubs and everything, and then she finds out that in moonless nights he turns into a HUMAN. Neri From willsonkmom at msn.com Sat Dec 4 21:11:52 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 21:11:52 -0000 Subject: Fat Friar (was ghosts, magicians and babies was Re: Questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119267 - > Carol notes: snip I really > don't see any contradiction between being a wizard and being a friar > in the *early* Middle Ages. Even as late as the fourteenth century, > when witch-burning was in full swing, he could have been known in the > MW for performing "miracles" instead of magic. > Potioncat: My curiosity was how did he mangage to train for both. I thought boys went to the monestary very young to prepare. Or is a fiar a different sort of religious figure? I know a fiar isn't a priest, but I don't know the difference. Potioncat From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Dec 4 21:45:05 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 21:45:05 -0000 Subject: Predictions for book 6 and 7. In-Reply-To: <200412032335458.SM01064@devbox> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119268 Hickengruendler: 25. Neville is not toast and will be the classmate who becomes a teacher, either in Herbology or in DA. > > Vivamus: > GREAT idea, and it would fit him. Unless he IS the HBP (and I think he is the best candidate for it of the ones we've seen,) his story is too painful not to find resolution. Carol adds: Since JKR has stated in an interview that one of Harry's classmates--not Ron and "not who you think" (Hermione?) will become a teacher at Hogwarts, I think it's a safe bet that Neville will survive and become the Herbology teacher. (As for the DADA teacher, if Snape survives, that has to be his position, even though he's a Master at Potions.) Carol From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Sat Dec 4 21:48:35 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 21:48:35 -0000 Subject: Asking JKR one question (was: Predictions for book 6 and 7) In-Reply-To: <20041204155636.94628.qmail@web53505.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119269 Moonmyst: > p.s.... If you could ask JKR just one thing, what would it be? (that she might actually answer!!) > > 1) Is Snape a vamp? > 2) Does Snape have kids? > 3) How does DD see all the things going on in Privet Drive before and while Harry is getting his letters in SS/PS? > 4) Just what is up with the nose biting tea cups? SSSusan: Noting that you said just one thing but actually listed four, I'll also list more than one. :-) 1) Is Lupin evil? 2) Did Lupin fire the spell which caused Sirius to fall through the veil? 3) Is DD capable of becoming invisible? Siriusly Snapey Susan From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Sat Dec 4 21:49:23 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2004 13:49:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Reputations (was Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041204214923.34194.qmail@web53104.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119270 --- demetra1225 wrote: > I think that Sirius met James on the Hogwarts Express, like Harry > met Ron. They hit it off. James shared with Sirius that he came > from a > long line of Gryffindors who despised the Dark Arts. Sirius, not > wanting to ruin this potential friendship, doesn't share that he > comes from a family of Slytherins who practice the Dark Arts (and > later asks the Sorting Hat to place him in Gryffindor). > Sirius does offer up to James that Severus Snape's family members > are > all Slytherins who are into the Dark Arts. After all, what better > for young boys to bond over, than a mutual enemy? Thus, the > beginning of Severus as the target of James and Snape's taunting. > Severus, having much the same personality we see in the adult > Snape, > does give back as good as he gets. And Severus, knowing full well > what Sirius Black's background is, sees Sirius as either a betrayer > of his heritage (by denying it) or as a coward for condemning > Severus to James' ridicule while hiding his own background. I do believe Demetra is right. This does strike me as the most likely (and least soap-operatic) beginning of the Sirius-Severus-James triangle. I would also add that while adult-30-something-Sirius has no trouble denying his family and feels no link with them at all, I somehow don't think teen-Sirius was quite as cold-blooded about the whole thing. Personal doubts of "I'm not like them!" would crop up from time to time and teen rebellion being a little difficult when you're away from home 10 months of the year, he took a stand against Snape who was on the scene, and who reacted so beautifully to being ragged because he always fought back and didn't act like a victim. I don't think Sirius really turned away from his real family until he'd replaced them with his adopted one - the Potters. YOung people need something to belong to. As for the question - why Snape? Why of all the kids at Hogwarts, was Snape the enemy? I think it's likely that he was self-selected, almost like Draco sets himself up for being Harry's enemy by being a prat at the robe shop and a snot on the train. I think James and Sirius had another bond in common: being rich kids. When you're used to money, you have really no idea what it's like not to have it, and I'm sure Severus tried to make common cause with Sirius and James at first by meeting them on a plane that all three shared - being purebloods. James rejected the overture because he was raised not to put any importance on that kind of thing. And Snape saw them as two arrogant rich kids while they saw him as Darks Arts warlock in the making. Magda __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com Sat Dec 4 21:59:38 2004 From: antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com (antoshachekhonte) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 21:59:38 -0000 Subject: Gabrielle in Book 7? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119271 A random thought just hit me: Gabrielle Delacourt was eight years old in GoF, when Harry was fourteen; she will be eleven when the last book starts. Anyone think Gabrielle is going to go to 'ogwarts? And if she does, what would her role be? From meriaugust at yahoo.com Sat Dec 4 22:08:16 2004 From: meriaugust at yahoo.com (meriaugust) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 22:08:16 -0000 Subject: Asking JKR one question (was: Predictions for book 6 and 7) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119272 > Moonmyst: > > p.s.... If you could ask JKR just one thing, what would it be? > (that she might actually answer!!) > > > > 1) Is Snape a vamp? > > 2) Does Snape have kids? > > 3) How does DD see all the things going on in Privet Drive before > and while Harry is getting his letters in SS/PS? > > 4) Just what is up with the nose biting tea cups? > > > SSSusan: > Noting that you said just one thing but actually listed four, I'll > also list more than one. :-) > > 1) Is Lupin evil? > 2) Did Lupin fire the spell which caused Sirius to fall through the > veil? To add: 1) Did Neville witness his parents being tortured and did he have his brain affected in some way? 2) What made James reform enough to get all those high praises from people? 3) How in the high heck did Hagrid's human father concieve a child with his giantess mother? Or do we want to know? Meri > 3) Is DD capable of becoming invisible? > From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Dec 4 22:25:03 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 22:25:03 -0000 Subject: The perils of immortality (Was: Harry's Protection) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119273 Snow wrote: > > A force that is at once more wonderful and more terrible than death > to live forever! To live forever would be wonderful until everyone > you have known has died. > >> The one thing that each of these statements maintain is the wonderful and terrible consequence. They are also something akin to what Dumbledore was speaking of in the end of the first book: > > SS- " You know, the Stone was really not such a wonderful thing. As > much money and life as you could want! The two things most human > beings would choose above all- the trouble is, humans do have a knack of choosing precisely those things that are worst for them." > > The Stone and all it had to offer was not such a wonderful thing > because it had its terrible side also. > The force that is contained in that same room must have to deal with > immortality, given the previous quote from Dumbledore about the Stone not being such a wonderful thing etc. > > In the end my suspicions would be that immortality is the force that > can be more wonderful and terrible and the power is `pure' self- > sacrificing protection. Carol responds: I don't think immortality is the power behind the locked door, but I think you're onto something important in thinkint that it's not as wonderful as Voldemort thinks it is, especially if immortality means an *earthly* life without the possibility of death. Death in the HP books seems to be a form of release from earthly cares, "the next great adventure" in which the dead can meet lost loved ones beyond the Veil. I get the sense that Nearly Headless Nick has somehow made the wrong choice, that he is missing something by having forfeited the chance to find out what lies beyond. And the most terrible fate possible in the WW is to have your soul sucked by a Dementor and to fall into nothingness with no chance *ever* to enter into whatever death offers to those like Sirius and the Potters who choose not to become ghosts. Evidently Nicholas Flamel and his wife, who denied themselves the chance to die for over six hundred years, evidently saw the error of their ways and gave up earthly existence for something better. (All this sounds vaguely Christian, of course, but JKR is a Christian, though not a fundamentalist, and clearly the soul and the life of the soul are important to her and to the book. that being the case, *earthly* immortality would not be a good thing. It would eliminate the possibility of ever passing beyond the Veil and entering "the next great adventure." I *think* this fits in with the line in the Prophecy, "Neither can live while the other *survives.*" The implication, for me, is that neither Harry nor Voldy is now fully alive; both are merely surviving. When one (presumably Voldy) ceases to "survive"--that is, when he ends his earthly existence and is permanently destroyed--the other (presumably Harry) can finally fully live. (This is at least what I hope is meant, but of course there are other readings.) Following this line of thought, Dumbledore's line about there being worse things than death may mean, in part, that the *inability to die* is the worst possible fate. Imagine, for example, that Voldemort, like Tithonus in the Greek myth, has eternal life but not eternal youth and withers away to a weak, toothless, hopelessly degenerate old man who is powerless and helpless but unable to die? There's also the legend of the Wandering Jew (popular in the nineteenth century but maybe forgotten now) who was punished for mocking Christ by being made to wander the earth forever, unable to find rest in death. Maybe others on the lis can think of better examples. (I don't want to bring in Tolkien's Elves because they could die in battle and had more or less eternal youth, so it's not the same thing.) I don't know how any of this fits with the power behind the locked door, but I think there's a difference between the immortality (eternal *earthly* life) symbolized by Voldemort's yew wand and the eternal *spiritual* life or resurrection symbolized by Harry's holly wand. Yew trees are planted by graveyards; holly is associated with Christmas and the ancient Druid festival of Yule. I'm not trying to turn HP into an overtly Christian allegory (as indicated, there are Greek and Druid elements as well), but does anyone see what I'm driving at, that the pursuit of immortality is unwise and even possibly evil in itself and Voldemort is in a sense dooming *himself* by his pursuit of it? Carol, who is not trying to present a coherent argument but only tossing out an idea in the hope that it will receive thoughtful responses From ryokas at hotmail.com Sat Dec 4 22:27:57 2004 From: ryokas at hotmail.com (kizor0) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 22:27:57 -0000 Subject: Asking JKR one question (was: Predictions for book 6 and 7) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119274 > Moonmyst: > p.s.... If you could ask JKR just one thing, what would it be? > (that she might actually answer!!) > > 1) Is Snape a vamp? > 2) Does Snape have kids? > 3) How does DD see all the things going on in Privet Drive > before > and while Harry is getting his letters in SS/PS? > 4) Just what is up with the nose biting tea cups? Plot questions are out. Even if she did answer one, would I actually want that? I'd likely just ask about magical weaponry, the kind that I ramble about in here: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/118583 Most likely about the possibility of defensive drones, small flying balls that whizz around the user and throw themselves to the path of incoming curses. > SSSusan: > 3) How in the high heck did Hagrid's human father concieve a child > with his giantess mother? Or do we want to know? Engorgement Charm, I'm afraid, and I didn't just say that. - Kizor From yswahl at stis.net Sat Dec 4 22:42:39 2004 From: yswahl at stis.net (samnanya) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 22:42:39 -0000 Subject: Just one question Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119275 What are the similarities between the two "real" Trelawney prophecies and why are they repeated twice ? From manawydan at ntlworld.com Sat Dec 4 22:46:01 2004 From: manawydan at ntlworld.com (manawydan) Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2004 22:46:01 -0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Hogwarts letters Re: Choosing sides References: <1102124439.4180.60076.m5@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <000601c4da53$08faa040$704b6d51@f3b7j4> No: HPFGUIDX 119276 Kjirstem wrote: > There is some indication that at least the Prime Minister knows about > the WW (isn't there? I could have sworn there was but I can't find it > now...). I wonder how they deal with taxes. I'd assume the WW pays > for the Ministry of Magic, etc, but you'd think someone in the MW > would get suspicious of Muggle-borns when they don't pay taxes. I > guess those Muggles never notice nuffink. Well, canon tells us that the WW knows about the PM (because they have a means of notifying the PM about certain things). It's far from clear that the reverse applies, and the Statute of Secrecy would suggest that it doesn't. My theory (which I've outlined before) is that the MoM has a sleeper somewhere high up in the Muggle bureaucracy who can pass on information to the PM if he needs to know it, albeit in a sanitised form that a Muggle can comprehend. Taxes? I doubt it. Income tax in the UK is paid through your employer or by doing a tax return if you're self employed. But if you and your employer are off the Inland Revenue's radar, they're not going to come looking for you, even if they knew you were there and knew where to look. The Statute of Secrecy would mean that WW employers would be barred from bringing themselves to Muggle attention anyway. The same would be true for indirect taxes. We've only ever seen wizards using wizard shops (though I know some on this list have theorised that they use Muggle shops also. If they do, then the money they pay over (unless they leave without paying) would include tax on certain items. Otherwise, they wouldn't. Likewise for property taxes. Wizard houses aren't on the books with the council - why? Because they're spelled not to be noticed unless someone looks really hard for them. Far more interesting thing to wonder about is how the MoM raises its revenues - the WW economy seems far too determinedly anarchic to be as closely ruled as the Muggle one! Cheers Ffred O Benryn wleth hyd Luch Reon Cymru yn unfryd gerhyd Wrion Gwret dy Cymry yghymeiri From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Dec 4 22:50:26 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 22:50:26 -0000 Subject: Snape/Occlumency again (Was: Does Viktor Krum become an important In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119277 > > Lupinlore, who is looking forward to Harry referring to Snape > > as "Snivelus." Carol adds, knowing that Lupinlore disagrees: I think that Harry's reaction to the Pensieve scene shows that he's above such pettiness. Or so I hope. Carol, who wants Harry to rise to a higher level, not sink to a lower one From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat Dec 4 22:54:25 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 22:54:25 -0000 Subject: Snape and Lupin's Character Arcs (was: Lupin's Char Arc) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119279 > > Pippin: I think that Snape has redeemed himself already, Harry just doesn't realize it. You can be a good person and not do well with children. Likewise, Lupin has fallen into evil (IMO) and Harry doesn't realize that either. You can be a bad person and relate very well to children. Ginny adored Riddle. Alla: Umm, Pippin, I love your arguments and admire you as debater, but I beg to differ Snape " not doing well with children" is (in my opinion only) an understatement of the century. Lupin "has fallen into evil" is not canon so far, right? I will bow to your greatness, if it will be, but for now, I don't see the comparison between Harry realising who Lupin is and who Snape is. Pippin: It's a great big world out there and being nice to Gyffindors is not the definition of goodness. > > Alla: Humiliating and degrating children on the daily basis and holding a grudge against one of them, because he has a misfortune to be son of someone who bullied you at school is NOT a definition of gooodness either.(at least in my book). From cunning_spirit at yahoo.com Sat Dec 4 23:04:14 2004 From: cunning_spirit at yahoo.com (cunning_spirit) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 23:04:14 -0000 Subject: Fat Friar (was ghosts, magicians and babies was Re: Questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119280 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Juli wrote: > > > > > > Elanor Pam wrote: > > > > The Fat Friar was a friar - but he was also a wizard (well, he's > HufflePuff's ghost, so I assume he was). > > > > > > Potioncat responded: > > > How did he become both? According to JKR the ghosts were in the > house they now haunt. If FF was at Hogwarts from 11--17, when did he > go to the monestary?> > > > > Juli: What if instead of being a wizard and a friar he was just a > wizard who by some reason got the nickname of fat friar? > > > > Juli > > Carol notes: > But isn't there a lso a pportrait of some monks in Hogwarts? > Presumably they were wizards as well, probably at a time when the > separation between the MW and the WW hadn't become final. > > I'm pretty sure that the Fat Friar was a Hufflepuff (after all, he's > that house's resident ghost) who became a real friar at around age > eighteen, but at his death decided that the best years of his life > were at Hogwarts, so that's where he returned after death. I really > don't see any contradiction between being a wizard and being a friar > in the *early* Middle Ages. Even as late as the fourteenth century, > when witch-burning was in full swing, he could have been known in the > MW for performing "miracles" instead of magic. > > Carol Cunning Spirit: There is also an entire order of ghostly nuns roaming the halls of Hogwarts. A friar is simply a monk. According to the OED, the word is orginally from Old French, and means "brother" and is used to refer to any member of a monastic order. Individuals entered monasteries for many reasons and could join at any age. They weren't really schools as we conceive of them, although, yes, there were a lot of children given to the church at an early age (ostensibly so that they could spend their lives praying for the benefit of their families, in many cases). If any of you remember any of the old "Brother Cadfael" Mysteries that the BBC produced starring Derek Jakobi, Brother Cadfael didn't enter holy orders until after he had already served a very full career as a knight and crusader. Becoming a monk or a nun might have been one of the safest options for wizarding folk who wished to maintain connections with the rest of the world. Remember that the Fat Friar was from Hufflepuff, known for its emphasis on teamwork and tolerance -- good basic training for someone who eventually would up serving in a religious community. From foxmoth at qnet.com Sat Dec 4 23:25:07 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 23:25:07 -0000 Subject: Snape and Lupin's Character Arcs (was: Lupin's Char Arc) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119281 > > > > Alla: > Humiliating and degrating children on the daily basis and holding a grudge against one of them, because he has a misfortune to be son of someone who bullied you at school is NOT a definition of gooodness either.(at least in my book).< Pippin: Harry doesn't attend Snape's class on a daily basis, thank goodness. And it isn't Snape's goading that humiliates Harry, it's his failures at potion-making and occlumency, and getting caught breaking rules. Those things are Harry's responsibility, not Snape's. If Harry knew he were in the right, Snape's goading wouldn't get to him any more than Vernon's. Would Harry do better with a teacher that didn't point out his failings in such a painful manner? In a subject where he wasn't motivated? His experiences in Divination and History of Magic don't suggest it. Harry doesn't see any reason to break a sweat in the subjects he doesn't care about, and he didn't care about potions. Pippin From nrenka at yahoo.com Sat Dec 4 23:52:40 2004 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 23:52:40 -0000 Subject: Snape and Lupin's Character Arcs (was: Lupin's Char Arc) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119282 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > Pippin: > > Would Harry do better with a teacher that didn't point out his > failings in such a painful manner? In a subject where he wasn't > motivated? His experiences in Divination and History of Magic > don't suggest it. Harry doesn't see any reason to break a sweat > in the subjects he doesn't care about, and he didn't care about > potions. That's a bit of the Law of the Excluded Middle there, Pippin. You make it sound as if it's a choice between Snape ('motivation' through continually poking, unfair treatment in class, and snide commentary) or Trelawney or Binns (fakery and indifference). Harry seems to do pretty well in Transfiguration with McGonagall, who is good at pointing out failings but not in an extremely personal or snide manner. What about Flitwick and Sprout, where Harry also seems to do decently? -Nora gets to work on her pedagogical method next year, alas From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Dec 5 00:05:40 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 00:05:40 -0000 Subject: Bloodlines & Social Order Backstory (Was: Another Flint) In-Reply-To: <01df01c4da1e$15999fc0$6701a8c0@MITRE.ORG> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119283 Carol earlier: > > First my apologies for being unclear. I certainly didn't mean that *you* were rewriting the story, and I'd be the last person to criticize theorizing or speculation on any point . > > > > I meant that JKR, via her narrator and the various characters, established Colin Creevey and the other victims of the basilisk as Muggleborns in CoS. *She* would have to rewrite the story to give them a different heritage if she thought it was important to do so, but she'd have to go to a lot of trouble to explain how the basilisk and Tom (or Ginny) got it wrong. > > > > I agree that a lot of attention has been focused on Dennis Creevey's size , and I'm sure we'll see more of both > > Creevey brothers. I'm also sure that Dennis Creevey's size will play a fairly important role. But, IMO, there's no need to change what we've been told about their heritage to do so. After all, we've yet to be told why Flitwick and Dedalus Diggle are tiny. Maybe, like Hagrid, Professor Flitwick will be revealed to have a nonhuman parent. But the Creeveys have been established as Muggleborns, and I think it would be more trouble than it's worth *to JKR* to explain how not only the Creeveys themselves but Ginny and Tom and apparently McGonagall and Dumbledore were wrong about victims being Muggleborns. > charme responded: > > Thanks for clearing that up, however we differ on an important point , the one being that JKR would have to "rewrite" anything to do with the social blood classifications and monikers she's established. I think there's more to that rationale than we've been told, and this may be part of the intent of the next book. I might also mention that in my mind, there has to be more a backstory not only with bloodline geneaology, but also history around the creature classification denoted to elves, goblins, and centaurs simply because they are referenced repeatedly in all of the books and more importantly in the DoM chapters of OoP. Add to that the revelation that giants and wizards married, wizards and Muggles [married], and one has to wonder that through some of the families bloodlines, if there aren't other creatures who have been in the mix in the genealogy in > some way. All it takes is the six degrees of seperation argument applied to genetics, then all manners of possibilities exist. Otherwise, why introduce half giants, and the various allusions to: > > appearing "troll" like (Flint), > tiny (Colin, Dennis, Flitwick), > large (Madame Maxime) > loping (the new character in HPB, which makes me connect loping with lions) > duck footed & round shouldered (Krum) > > I'm sure there are others and would love to list them all. > > I also note Ron's comments in CoS that state that wizards would have died out if they hadn't started to marry Muggles - might that be the same for the other races like elves and goblins? Add this to why statues of supposed *creatures* would appear in the MoM along with wizards who believe their races to be beneath them? DD alludes to an answer when talking to Harry in his office after the DoM battle, by saying for too long wizards have mistreated and abused their fellows and are reaping their reward - and the statues in the MoM depict and are describe to the reader as almost a "greater than thou" attitude of dominance over them. Since JKR has referenced racial inequality and WW2 in her comments on various interviews, chats and her website, I can only surmise there's more backstory to be generated to these references. Carol responds: It seems to me that you're connecting two different elements of the story, 1) the prejudice against Muggles and Muggleborns that permeates Slytherin House and partially motivates the DEs (it was the idea of defending that ideology that attracted poor deluded little Regulus Black) and 2) the separate prejudice against nonhuman magical creatures like house-elves and centaurs that seems to be common throughout the WW. (Even Hermione, despite her good intentions and Muggle upbringing, misunderstands both groups.) There's no question in my mind that the fountain in the MoM is significant in its depiction of the WW's idealized view of witches and wizards in relation to other magical beings, and its destruction is equally significant. And certainly JKR wants us to sympathize with Hermione's opposition to house-elf slavery, if not with her methods for solving the problem. But I don't see the need to reveal that the Muggleborns in CoS weren't really Muggleborns (Hermione, for example, certainly was) as in any way necessary to the development of those separate but related themes. For one thing, we've seen through both Hermione and Lily that the prejudice against Muggleborns as inferior to other wizards is simply mistaken. (IMO, the pureblood prejudice can be traced to a fear of having Squib offspring if you marry a Muggle or a Muggleborn, but that's neither here nor there.) I see where you're going with the idea that Hagrid's and Madame Maxime's size led to the revelation that they're both half-giant and played into the prejudice thread, and I see why you might think that the Creevey brothers' size will end in a similar revelation. But I really hope JKR won't repeat the same device again. We've already been there and we've got the point. Besides, as I've said twice already, the unlikelihood of a house-elf marrying a Muggle is extreme, and there would almost certainly be other features that distinguished these two supposed Muggleborns from normal human children if their mother were a house-elf (pointy ears and baldness, most notably). And how could their mother possibly have passed as a Muggle all these years? Impossible, IMO. So if anyone's going to turn out to be half house-elf and half wizard, it will almost certainly be Flitwick. That way JKR will simply have to add a new element to his history (about which we know virtually nothing) rather than rewriting the history of the Creevey brothers and having to explain why they were mistaken for Muggleborns in CoS. As for images associated with particular characters, we do have dog imagery associated with Sirius, who turns out to be a dog animagus but not, thankfully, half-dog. We also have bat imagery associated with Snape, leading to the idea (vetoed by JKR) that he's a vampire. It may be that his patronus is a bat, though I think it's Dumbledore. ;-) And how about the comparison of Trelawney in her green sequined gown to a glittering dragonfly? I don't think it suggests that she's a dragonfly animagus, much less half dragonfly. It's just a metaphor. So is Krum's duck-footed walk, which simply emphasizes his awkwardness on the ground as opposed to his grace as a seeker. I don't think he's going to be exposed as half-human (Durmstrang, IIRC, doesn't admit Muggleborns and almost certainly wouldn't admit part humans). And I think, though of course I could be wrong, that the narrator's comparison of Marcus Flint to a troll and Millicent Bulstrode hag is just a metaphor, just Harry's impression of these thoroughly unpleasant people. (I dislike the idea of ugliness being associated with evil, as in traditional fairy stories, but that's another problem altogether.) It's most unlikely that a house which excludes Muggleborns on principle would admit part-humans, who would be infinitely more inferior in the eyes of Lucius or Draco Malfoy. Marcus Flint is (IMO) almost as unlikely to be part troll as Snape is to be part bat. And Ron's remark that witches and wizards would have died out if they hadn't intermarried with the much more numerous--and equally human--Muggles does not extend, in my view, to the intermarriage with nonhuman magical creatures, which seems to be extremely rare and almost universally frowned upon. So I agree completely that JKR will follow up on the themes of inequality, slavery, and prejudice that have become more and more prominent as the series progresses. In fact, it's altogether too clear where JKR stands and where she wants the reader to stand on these issues. A little more subtlety would have been nice. But I don't think we're going to see the Creevey brothers revealed as something other than Muggleborns to make her point. In fact, if she reveals them as more talented than she's previously indicated, she'll have better ammunition for her argument that Muggleborns are as good as any other wizards. Currently, Harry's team consists of himself, a half-blood; Hermione, the single Muggleborn; two Weasleys and Neville Longbottom, all purebloods; and Luna Lovegood, whose parents are/were a witch and a wizard, so she's at least a half-blood in the same sense as Harry is and may well be a pureblood. So there's a need for more Muggleborns on the team. Why not the Creevey brothers, who are fanatically loyal, especially tiny Dennis, whose reckless fearlessness rivals Sirius Black's? If you want a part-human character other than Hagrid and Madame Maxime who could play an important role in the Order in the upcoming books, how about Fleur, who's one-quarter Veela? (How that's possible, I won't ask.) Carol, wondering if Bill Weasley is destined to be the father of a lot of pretty, red-haired, temperamental little girls From saraandra at saraandra.plus.com Sun Dec 5 00:23:47 2004 From: saraandra at saraandra.plus.com (amanitamuscaria1) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 00:23:47 -0000 Subject: Surprise me, dammit !!!!! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119284 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "samnanya" wrote: Snippity-snip (tho I agree with you on the set minds/mindset) > > What is far more interesting (to me at least) is plotting. snip >.... (i.e. End of book 7 --- and Harry woke up and it > was all a dream told to him by his scar) GAAH! snipagain > > DON'T BE SUPRISED IF ........... > > 1. Draco Malfoy turns out to be the HBP (DM!HBP Theory) > --------------------------------------------------------- > I had proposed this several months ago and it was promptly ignored > with rather feeble arguments why this CANNOT be so. But dont rule it > out! We know that Narcissa is pure blood, but precious little is known > about Lucius' background. snipalot Movie contamination does dreadful things to Lucius and Draco - they both have had a lot of column inches for an adult who's thwarted by a boy and an elf, and a boy who can't seem to get over a petty slight and understand the real game. Lucius' background - hmmm - there's got to be some reason he's such a greasy-pole climber ... > > 2. Luna Lovegood will be a Major Major part of Harry's life in HBP, > replacing Hermione for most of Book 6 > snipsnipsnip Yes. JKR can't just throw in a juicy character like that, and leave her languishing on the sidelines. Major player, here. But it would be too sad to waste her on Neville, or Ron, as the shippers would have it. She is going to have some crucial knowledge, something Harry needs. This will really p*** off Hermione. You know it's going to sound flaky. > > 3. The Joke Shop & then Knockturn Alley will be major settings in HBP snipsnip > If you read the > last chapter of OOP you will sense that Harry didnt feel comfortable > with ANYONE he formerly felt comfortable with -- not DD, Hermione or > Ron, Hagrid. So where else would he go? He lied to Molly and Hagrid > and Ron and Hermione dont REALLY know what he went through. A return > to Grimauld Place is probably premature (unless you are into elfacide) The elf is gone. DD took care of that. > The Joke Shop is probably the safest place for Harry in his condition. > > As far as Knockturn Alley, it would be an interesting destination to > Harry on the run. snipagain Knockturn Alley - an interesting choice. Harry's now faced death several times. He's not going to be afraid of some toenails on a tray. I reckon a combination of events: DD will die in a face-off with Voldemort. Harry will slink away from that battle feeling defeated. He may be rumoured to be dead - I'm not sure he'll complete his time at Hogwarts - he needs the links to students and teachers, but I can't see him being content to sit at a desk. > > 4.Ginny is unhinged in time and is not who (or what) she seems to be >snippingscissors Ginny is a curious creation. I agree there. > 5. Snape will disappear & Hermione will be vital to the art of potions > (though she wont be a teacher yet) > -------------------------------------------------------------------- Dunno. > > 6. The Marauders Map will be revealed to have powerful dark magic and > will be the key to the invasion of Hogwarts > -------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > So far it is all fun and games, but read POA very carefully for some > of its more scarier properties. and dont forget that Peter Pettigrew > was one of the authors (as was lupin) > Mmmm -yes. Good thought - there's a lot of things that turn out not to be what they appear to be, and there's Arthur Weasley's warning ... busysnippingscissors > Hagrid's quotes are also quite interesting and double edged..... > Harry's self sacrificing tendencies are critical > Hagrid is, after all, the Keeper of the Keys and Grounds at Hogwarts. The movie contamination of him saying things he shouldn't - the information he gives the Trio isn't by mistake. I shouldn't be surprised if it's been OK'd by DD. By the way, I've always wondered if Hagrid's father, described as a wizard, wasn't the sort of wizard Flitwick is? It seems a bit out of proportion if Hagrid, in his teens, could sit his father on his shoulder. > > 10. The end of Hogwarts will be the biggest suprise the end of the > series > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > I just cant imagine JKR wanting to continue this after the series > concludes. Snip the funny Trelawney line. No, she doesn't have to continue the series, but she doesn't have to kill Hogwarts, either. She could simply move the wizard and muggle worlds a bit further apart. I reckon those Time Turners might be why the wizard world is dying out - just seems to me to be the sort of solution one might take if the opportunity was there. I'll have to think a bit more on your challenge; there's so much wrong with both the muggle and wizarding worlds, I can't see anyone expecting solutions from any of them. Cheers. AmanitaMuscaria From alshainofthenorth at yahoo.co.uk Sun Dec 5 00:24:46 2004 From: alshainofthenorth at yahoo.co.uk (alshainofthenorth) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 00:24:46 -0000 Subject: Hagrid & Hufflepuffs (was: Slytherin House again; Duffers) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119285 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > Potioncat: > Yes, I can see it now, dictionaries at ten paces! > > "An inept person" am I last the one on the list to get the joke that > it's "Hagrid" who makes the duffer comment? > > Given the original topic of this thread, it speaks volumes that > Cedric was a Hufflepuff and not clumsy or inept, there's hope for > Slytherin yet. > > Potioncat who,now more than ever, would fit in Hufflepuff... --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > Regarding the Slytherins' views of other houses, it strikes me that > Draco's view of Hufflepuff is similar to Ron's (or was it Hagrid who > called them "duffers"?) and his view of Ravenclaw as the second-best > house is similar to Hermione's. > > Carol, very much hoping that Theo will be an important character in HBP Alshain: Though I feel slightly presumptuous about correcting two of the most senior posters of HPFGU, Hagrid never says that Hufflepuffs are a load of duffers. What he *does* say is "Everyone says Hufflepuffs are a load o' duffers, but--" before being interrupted by Harry. And finishes with "Better Hufflepuff than Slytherin." At least to me this makes it clear that he doesn't share everyone's sentiments on Hufflepuff. Does someone else think Cedric would have become head boy if he'd lived, speaking of Hufflepuffs? Alshain From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Dec 5 00:33:22 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 00:33:22 -0000 Subject: Harry's Protection (was Re: Questions) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119286 Snow wrote: > According to the prophecy, Harry was born with the `power' to > vanquish the dark lord. Harry already had this power but it may have > become reinforced with his mother's protection. As Harry grows and > questions his own behavior, after the fact, he may learn how to > control this power to its eventual necessity to defeat Voldemort. Carol responds: "The one with the power approaches" doesn't necessarily suggest that Harry is born with the power. Granted, Harry has not been born yet, but we don't know how far in the future the "approach" is. As I read it, the Prophecy can apply to either Harry or Neville until Voldemort "marks {Harry} as his equal." So the power may well have entered Harry with the combination of his mother's sacrifice and the rebounded AK. (I still think there's more to it, and that his mother placed a charm on him that enabled him to survive the SK in the first place and allowed Dumbledore to extend the blood protection to Privet Drive through Petunia, but I won't get into that.) At any rate, I don't think we can exclude the possibility that Harry was just an ordinary wizard baby with whatever powers and talents he inherited from his parents until the events at Godric's Hollow turned him into "the Boy Who Lived" and moved the Prophecy one step closer to fulfillment. If the power is Love or Sacrificial Love, he certainly wasn't born with it. If it's Immortality or the Life Force (whatever that may mean), he wasn't born with that either. The only trait he seems to have been born with (other than being sufficiently magical to attend Hogwarts and a talent for flying and Quidditch inherited from James) is courage. I don't think *that's* a trait acquired from Voldemort at Godric's Hollow. But Neville has courage, too, and also seems to have been born with it. So I have no idea what the power that will enable Harry to defeat Voldemort is, but whatever it is, I don't think we can safely assume that he was born with it. Aside from surviving an AK and acquiring the dubious gift of Parseltongue, he probably acquired other powers (resistance to Imperios? Legilimency?) when the AK bounced off him onto Voldemort (or when Voldemort's body disintegrated), and it may well be that the mysterious power that can destroy Voldemort was acquired then. Or it may "just" be the power of Lily's sacrificial love, which again he wasn't born with, but is in a sense her dying gift or legacy. Carol, with apologies for a seeming quibble that nevertheless may turn out to be important From foxmoth at qnet.com Sun Dec 5 00:54:56 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 00:54:56 -0000 Subject: Snape and Lupin's Character Arcs (was: Lupin's Char Arc) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119287 > > Pippin: > > > > Would Harry do better with a teacher that didn't point out his failings in such a painful manner? In a subject where he wasn't motivated? His experiences in Divination and History of Magic don't suggest it. Harry doesn't see any reason to break a sweat in the subjects he doesn't care about, and he didn't care about potions. Nora: > That's a bit of the Law of the Excluded Middle there, Pippin. You make it sound as if it's a choice between Snape ('motivation' through continually poking, unfair treatment in class, and snide commentary) or Trelawney or Binns (fakery and indifference). Harry seems to do pretty well in Transfiguration with McGonagall, who is good at pointing out failings but not in an extremely personal or snide manner. What about Flitwick and Sprout, where Harry also seems to do decently?< Pippin: What about them? He's motivated in those subjects...he enjoys foolish wand-waving, even when he doesn't get it right, and he seems to be competent at herbology too if Aunt Petunia's garden is any guide. We'd have to see how Harry did with a competent but undemanding teacher in a subject he didn't like or see the point of and I can't think of one. Or come to think of it, Snape in a class where Harry is competent. Like DADA ::flips pages of PoA:: yep, I'm right. No humiliations for Harry there, aside from being docked five points for showing up ten minutes late and another for not taking his seat when asked. Any teacher would do that. Pippin From nrenka at yahoo.com Sun Dec 5 01:10:29 2004 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 01:10:29 -0000 Subject: Snape and Lupin's Character Arcs (was: Lupin's Char Arc) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119288 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > Pippin: > > We'd have to see how Harry did with a competent but > undemanding teacher in a subject he didn't like or see the point > of and I can't think of one. Or come to think of it, Snape in a > class where Harry is competent. Like DADA ::flips pages of PoA:: > yep, I'm right. No humiliations for Harry there, aside from being > docked five points for showing up ten minutes late and another > for not taking his seat when asked. Any teacher would do that. Snape in DADA there is not exactly a model of good teaching, though. It's true that he's not narrowed in on Harry, but he does treat Hermione nastily (it's eminently possible to get someone to be quiet without doing it the way he does, after all), probably because the goal of his class is to expose Lupin. You have to love how JKR lets us know about how well Snape actually teaches in that class, though. There's really no other way to read the revelations (annotated to make sure the reader does not miss it) in Fantastic Beasts that Snape, taking off points in the class about Kappas, is actually wrong himself. But, back to the other topic for just a comment, I don't think it's necessarily true that Harry would have been apathetic about Potions sans the nasty treatment. The statement "When you assume, you make an ass out of you and me" comes to mind for that opening class. At least in my career as student, I've found consideration and measurement rather than aggression to be considerably more effective pedagogical models, and I've been subject to both. I think Snape is teaching the way he wants to teach with the side effect that Harry learns something. Not that Snape is teaching the way he is with the explicit goal that Harry will learn something-- that is to say, I don't think his methodology is consciously targeted at making **Harry Potter** learn. -Nora has nothing but disdain for those who abuse their power in the classroom, having seen far too many From griffin782002 at yahoo.com Sun Dec 5 01:35:30 2004 From: griffin782002 at yahoo.com (sp. sot.) Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2004 17:35:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Fat Friar (was ghosts, magicians and babies was Re: Questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041205013530.39657.qmail@web52710.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119289 justcarol67 wrote: > > Potioncat responded: > > How did he become both? According to JKR the ghosts were in the house they now haunt. If FF was at Hogwarts from 11--17, when did he go to the monestary?> > Carol notes: But isn't there a lso a pportrait of some monks in Hogwarts? Presumably they were wizards as well, probably at a time when the separation between the MW and the WW hadn't become final. I'm pretty sure that the Fat Friar was a Hufflepuff (after all, he's that house's resident ghost) who became a real friar at around age eighteen, but at his death decided that the best years of his life were at Hogwarts, so that's where he returned after death. I really don't see any contradiction between being a wizard and being a friar in the *early* Middle Ages. Even as late as the fourteenth century, when witch-burning was in full swing, he could have been known in the MW for performing "miracles" instead of magic. Carol Griffin782002 now: Well, I have no idea about JKR mentioning that the ghosts did once belonged to the houses they now haunt, but I wonder what if he was a Muggle friar with acquitances to the WW, in a time as Carol said when the split between Muggles and Wizards was not final, and that he went to live as a ghost in Hogwarts? I mean there are stories of haunted houses in RW. And if in the Potterverse only wizards can become ghosts that mean ghosts in Muggle residences were Wizards too? Griffin782002 who thinks that locking her mother, brother and mother's sister in the Death Chamber would a more effective way to kill someone; they horrible singers!!!! :-P 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!? The all-new My Yahoo! ? What will yours do? [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From khinterberg at yahoo.com Sun Dec 5 01:47:33 2004 From: khinterberg at yahoo.com (khinterberg) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 01:47:33 -0000 Subject: Hallowe'en Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119290 I was wondering if perhaps Jo chose the night of Halloween as the night of the attack at Godric's Hollow not only to immediately make us connect with a story of witches and wizards, but if perhaps there was a deeper meaning. Halloween has morphed from the Celtic feast day of Samhain, the beginning of winter. This was one of the four nights of the year when the gods drew nearer to the earthly world. Could there be some significance in this for why Voldy attacked young Harry on a night that the gods would be close to the earth? khinterberg From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Dec 5 01:51:57 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 01:51:57 -0000 Subject: Fat Friar (was ghosts, magicians and babies was Re: Questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119291 Carol notes: > > I really don't see any contradiction between being a wizard and being a friar in the *early* Middle Ages. Even as late as the fourteenth century, when witch-burning was in full swing, he could have been known in the MW for performing "miracles" instead of magic. > > > > Potioncat: > My curiosity was how did he mangage to train for both. I thought > boys went to the monestary very young to prepare. Or is a fiar a > different sort of religious figure? I know a fiar isn't a priest, > but I don't know the difference. Carol responds: On the simplest level, monks lived in monasteries, which were communally owned, but friars, at least originally, owned no property and had to beg for food. I can't see our Fat Friar having that lifestyle, however! At any rate, I don't think that monks had to be educated in a monastery as long as they could read and write, and I'm not sure that friars (who didn't copy or illustrate manuscripts) had to be educated at all. It appears that you could become a monk or a friar at any age. (There's a story that St. Thomas Aquinas's father intended to place him in a monastery to become a monk, but young Thomas announced his intention to become a friar instead, at which point the rest of the family flew at him in a rage, tore his friar's frock from his back, and locked him up in a cage like a lunatic. Don't know how true it is, but there was clearly a *social* distinction between monks and friars. You can see it again in Chaucer's "Canterbury Tales." The monk is very worldly and likes to ride and hunt; the friar thinks he should be given money for hearing confessions but thinks visiting lepers is beneath him. Chaucer, of couse, is ridiculing both of the and attacking the Church for falling into worldliness.) I don't know how helpful any of this is, or how JKR's view of education fits with the historical reality, which probably varied somewhat from order to order and century to century, anyway. But as I said in another post, it appears that monks as well as the Fat Friar were educated at Hogwarts. Doesn't Sir Cadogan run inside a portrait of two monks when he's showing the way to Trelawney's tower? And those monks were presumably Hogwarts graduates (and of course wizards) like the Fat Friar. Maybe it's one of those things we shouldn't worry about, like how the entrance to the Chamber of Secrets came to be connected to the (fairly) modern plumbing of Moaning Myrtle's restroom. Carol, who needs to read the books again but is spending time posting instead From luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca Sun Dec 5 01:55:46 2004 From: luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca (Bee Chase) Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2004 20:55:46 -0500 (EST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Asking JKR one question (was: Predictions for book 6 and 7) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041205015546.36340.qmail@web52002.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119292 cubfanbudwoman wrote: Moonmyst: > p.s.... If you could ask JKR just one thing, what would it be? (that she might actually answer!!) > > 1) Is Snape a vamp? > 2) Does Snape have kids? > 3) How does DD see all the things going on in Privet Drive before and while Harry is getting his letters in SS/PS? > 4) Just what is up with the nose biting tea cups? SSSusan: Noting that you said just one thing but actually listed four, I'll also list more than one. :-) 1) Is Lupin evil? 2) Did Lupin fire the spell which caused Sirius to fall through the veil? 3) Is DD capable of becoming invisible? Siriusly Snapey Susan Luckdragon's requests: Were the Potter's in possession of the sorcerers stone before their deaths? Was Argo Pyrites involved in preventing Voldemorts death when he tried to kill Harry? 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 MadameSSnape at aol.com Sun Dec 5 02:12:55 2004 From: MadameSSnape at aol.com (MadameSSnape at aol.com) Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2004 21:12:55 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Fat Friar (was ghosts, magicians and babies was Re: Quest... Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119293 In a message dated 12/4/2004 8:36:29 PM Eastern Standard Time, griffin782002 at yahoo.com writes: Well, I have no idea about JKR mentioning that the ghosts did once belonged to the houses they now haunt, but I wonder what if he was a Muggle friar with acquitances to the WW, ========== Sherrie here: I don't have the books to hand - I'm in a motel room in Gettysburg - but doesn't Sir Nick in OotP say something about the ghosts having House allegiances, though they cooperate in practice? And when Harry is asking about Sirius, I KNOW Nick tells him that only wizards can become ghosts - which eliminates the possibility that the Friar was a Muggle. Sherrie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Dec 5 02:13:59 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 02:13:59 -0000 Subject: Asking JKR one question (was: Predictions for book 6 and 7) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119294 > Moonmyst wrote: > If you could ask JKR just one thing, what would it be? (that she might actually answer!!) > > 1) Is Snape a vamp? > 2) Does Snape have kids? > 3) How does DD see all the things going on in Privet Drive before and while Harry is getting his letters in SS/PS? > 4) Just what is up with the nose biting tea cups? > > Siriusly Snapey Susan responded: > Noting that you said just one thing but actually listed four, I'll > also list more than one. :-) > > 1) Is Lupin evil? > 2) Did Lupin fire the spell which caused Sirius to fall through the > veil? > 3) Is DD capable of becoming invisible? > > Carol adds: I think if we're going to ask JKR questions (theoretically), we might receive more detailed answers from "how" or "why" questions rather than "yes/no" questions (and she tends to avoid a clear "yes" or "no," anyway). maybe there aren't any good questions--other than the ones Harry has already asked about Snape and the ones we're all asking about Godric's Hollow--but I'll give it a shot (not limiting myself to one since you two didn't). 1) What really happened in the Prank, and what was the extent of James's involvement? 2) What did Sirius intend to do when he ran after Peter and how exactly did Peter blow off his finger, blow up the street, and leave bloody robes on the ground all at the same time without calling attention to himself? 3) When did Snape begin teaching at Hogwarts (beginning of term or after Godric's Hollow)? Where was he and what was he doing that night? 4) How did the Daily Prophet (and the WW in general) know that Voldemort had lost his powers but was not dead? 5) Why did the Lestranges and Barty Jr. go after the Longbottoms? Why would they (the Longbottoms) be likely to know what had happened to Voldemort? 6) Where was Neville when his parents were Crucio'd into insanity? Okay, I'd better stop now, but there's a lot I want to know. And, yes, I know JKR wouldn't answer those questions, or at least not most of them, in an interview or a chat, but I sure hope she answers them in HPB. Carol, who likes moonmyst's third question and thinks it might actually stand a chance of being answered outside the books From willsonkmom at msn.com Sun Dec 5 02:23:09 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 02:23:09 -0000 Subject: Hagrid & Hufflepuffs (was: Slytherin House again; Duffers) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119295 Alshain: > Does someone else think Cedric would have become head boy if he'd > lived, speaking of Hufflepuffs? > Potioncat: He would have deserved it. But so far the only two head boys we've been told of were James and Percy. Harry doesn't seem to pay them much attention. (BTW Was Cedric a 6th year or a 7th year?) From willsonkmom at msn.com Sun Dec 5 02:31:05 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 02:31:05 -0000 Subject: Bloodlines & Social Order Backstory (Was: Another Flint) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119296 > Carol wrote: snip > And I think, though of course I could be wrong, that the narrator's > comparison of Marcus Flint to a troll and Millicent Bulstrode hag is > just a metaphor, just Harry's impression of these thoroughly > unpleasant people. (I dislike the idea of ugliness being associated > with evil, as in traditional fairy stories, but that's another problem > altogether.) It's most unlikely that a house which excludes > Muggleborns on principle would admit part-humans, who would be > infinitely more inferior in the eyes of Lucius or Draco Malfoy. Marcus > Flint is (IMO) almost as unlikely to be part troll as Snape is to be part bat. snip Potioncat: I've noticed that Slytherins are described in less than attractive ways. But if you look at it, the Gryffindors are not pretty either (movie contamination aside) I don't have canon to quote, but IIRC, Hermione has frizzy hair and large teeth, Ron is gangly with a long nose, Harry has terrible hair and a scar... I'm not sure if this is something JKR will use to turn things upside down for us, or if she is just very good at using ordinary people as her inspiration. (Pansy looks like a pug, Hermione looks like a beaver) Potioncat From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Dec 5 02:36:12 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 02:36:12 -0000 Subject: Snape and Lupin's Character Arcs (was: Lupin's Char Arc) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119297 Nora wrote: > You have to love how JKR lets us know about how well Snape actually > teaches in that class, though. There's really no other way to read > the revelations (annotated to make sure the reader does not miss it) > in Fantastic Beasts that Snape, taking off points in the class about > Kappas, is actually wrong himself. Carol asks: Are you sure this isn't just another example of JKR blaming the character for her own inconsistency (the classic example being Marcus Flint being held back a year becaus JKR forgot what year he was in)? I don't think that an "error" that isn't obvious to a reader of the HP books alone can really be used to expose Snape's capabilities as a DADA teacher, not to mention that it's out of character for him to make a pronouncement of that sort without being right. And the Pensieve scene seems to indicate that he really is knowledgeable about DADA. Carol, wondering what Pippin thinks on this one From iris_ft at yahoo.fr Sun Dec 5 02:36:27 2004 From: iris_ft at yahoo.fr (iris_ft) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 02:36:27 -0000 Subject: The perils of immortality (Was: Harry's Protection) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119298 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > Evidently Nicholas Flamel and his wife, who denied themselves the > chance to die for over six hundred years, evidently saw the error of > their ways and gave up earthly existence for something better. (All > this sounds vaguely Christian, of course, but JKR is a Christian, > though not a fundamentalist, and clearly the soul and the life of the > soul are important to her and to the book. that being the case, > *earthly* immortality would not be a good thing. It would eliminate > the possibility of ever passing beyond the Veil and entering "the next > great adventure." > Iris now: JKR is not only a Christian. She is also someone who had to face the loss of a beloved person, her own mother. I've always wondered if there was a tie between her decision to write Harry's story the way she did, and the loss of her mother. Hmmm, that's rather difficult to explain. When you loose people you love, particularly if their death comes after a long agony, there's always a moment when you wish you could stopper time, so you could perhaps stopper death. Or you wish they could turn time, so maybe everything would be different, or more precisely, wouldn't change in your own life. Indeed, death is not "the next great adventure" only for the one who is about to pass "beyond the veil". It's also "the next great adventure" for the ones who remain alone. It is a huge change; sometimes it is like a true cataclysm. When somebody dies, necessarily the persons who remain "facing the veil" see their life change more or less completely. And that's a scary perspective, because they are not prepared. See how what's "coming next" is problematic to most of us, even if it's not as important as death. We spent our time looking anxiously at tomorrow, trying to know, to determine what it will be. It part of our human condition. And we generally don't like changes too much (I'm not talking about changing the way you look or the colour of the wall paper in your living room; I'm talking about changing from a spiritual point of view). Changing is not always a very comfortable situation, even if it happens to be finally a good thing. And death is the kind of definitive change that makes you feel weak and helpless. You feel weak and helpless when you face a sudden death, or when you face a long agony. You feel weak and helpless when you face the perspective of your own death, because whatever you believe in, you don't know what's beyond the veil. And I think JKR felt weak and helpless when her mother died; I think she wished she could stopper time, stopper death. Just the kind of thing Voldemort tries to do. Voldemort doesn't want to die, and he doesn't want to change, at least, spiritually. He's like a "spiritual still life". He's completely mistaken; he didn't understand or he didn't want to understand that change was at the same time inevitable and necessary. That's why he refers to an ideology (Salazar Slytherin's) that denies precisely the benefit change can provide the wizard society with. Slytherin didn't accept to teach muggle born students because it sounded like a revolution, because it would change the wizard society. He was afraid of change; and so does Voldemort when he claims he is his heir. I don't know if I'm relevant, but I think that when JKR presents Voldemort's quest for immortality as a bad thing, she tries to exorcise what she felt when her own mother died. She makes Voldemort try to do what she was unable to achieve, and turning his thirst of immortality into an evil behaviour, making him fail, she gives herself the possibility to accept that she was unable to avoid what happened. But there's also one thing you can notice when you have to face someone's death: you finally find the way to go on, and sometimes you discover in your heart, in your mind, strengths you didn't even suspect. You survive. Just like Harry. He survives because he changes and doesn't see it as a calamity; or at least he tries to accept it, even if it opens the perspective of his own loneliness, of his own death, like at the end of OotP. JKR decided to choose a child as the hero of her books because that's the kind of person who can't avoid changes. Harry is an amazing summary of what people(the author, her readers) have to accept: he's a survivor, waiting for the moment of his own death. I can hear you say that it is a very sad and pessimistic portrait. Well, not at all; it's simply realistic. We all are survivors, considering our anxious reflection in a mirror. And we all know that we will have to die soon or later. Accepting it, trying to live as well as we can, maybe that's what makes a mind being "well prepared". What Dumbledore tells Harry at the end of the first book could be what JKR would have liked to be told herself when her mother died. Being "a well prepared mind" could be at the same time facing your own loneliness (just like Harry does after learning how his mother died), and accepting the fact that you are not going to live forever. Of course, it's not easy at all. I don't know if it is possible to face death serenely; personally, I can't. But though it's very hard; though we feel weak, helpless, and afraid, we are here, and we go on, and we try to do for the best. And sometimes, we are lucky enough to find an artist to help us understand we are not that alone. Just my opinion of course, Amicalement, Iris From bob.oliver at cox.net Sun Dec 5 02:48:52 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 02:48:52 -0000 Subject: Snape/Occlumency again (Was: Does Viktor Krum become an important In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119299 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > > > Potioncat: > You mean, you want Harry to become more like Snape? To be honest, > there have been times that I've thought that Snape is really > Grownup!Harry, but I can't make it work out. > Potioncat Perhaps a *little* more like Snape, yes, but also a *little* more like Lupin and maybe eventually a *little* bit more like Dumbledore. I think that both Snape and Voldemort represent possible futures for Harry. However, I think Snape is the most dangerous, because he represents a much more plausible future. At this time Harry is in a crux of development. He will not revert to the way he was, perhaps unfortunately. He must go forward having been damaged badly. How will he deal with that? Severus is one model, and I think that it is likely Harry will adopt aspects of that, as we have seen him doing to an extent already. Lupin is another. Neither of these models is entirely healthy. Snape's deficiencies are obvious. Lupin's are more subtle, but fit into the rubric that JKR gave in one of her talks when she said "the only thing wrong with Lupin is he wants desperately to be liked." Lupin in a way is the anti-Snape. He supresses resentment and other negative emotions to the point of becoming passive and dependent on others for his sense of self-worth. I am hoping Harry will be able to adopt the more *positive* aspects of both models. That is, I hope he is able to absorb Lupin's kindness and basic calm (without his passivity) along with Snape's ability to lash out in defense of himself (without Snape's injustice). It is for this reason that I am hoping Lupin will shrug off his passivity and become Harry's mentor and confidante. Harry will have a great deal of contact with Snape at Hogwarts, one way or the other and, although he hates the man, he cannot help but be influenced by Snape's example (particularly since it seems so successful for Snape). Lupin could provide a much needed counterbalance. Lupinlore From nrenka at yahoo.com Sun Dec 5 02:50:18 2004 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 02:50:18 -0000 Subject: Snape and Lupin's Character Arcs (was: Lupin's Char Arc) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119300 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > Carol asks: > Are you sure this isn't just another example of JKR blaming the > character for her own inconsistency (the classic example being > Marcus Flint being held back a year becaus JKR forgot what year he > was in)? I don't think that an "error" that isn't obvious to a > reader of the HP books alone can really be used to expose Snape's > capabilities as a DADA teacher, not to mention that it's out of > character for him to make a pronouncement of that sort without > being right. And the Pensieve scene seems to indicate that he > really is knowledgeable about DADA. Why yes, I am sure. :) Think about it this way. Snape makes the pronouncement in class, and tells a student that the answer is wrong. JKR, with Fantastic Beasts, publishes an answer about Kappas that is different--and is, moreover, in accordance with traditional folklore. Kappas are Japanese--I knew that, and I boggled at Snape immediately when he said they were from Mongolia. (There's a cute occurrence of them in Final Fantasy 6, for you video game fans, under the name of 'Imps'-- yeah, that's a Kappa). Here's another link, for the folklorists: http://www.onmarkproductions.com/html/kappa.shtml It's only out of character for him because you are *assuming* that he is an absolute expert here. However, canonically (with the addition of the schoolbooks), Snape is wrong--and JKR is making absolutely dead SURE that we know he is wrong by 'Harry and Ron's' comments in the book. It can't be a FLINT, because it does not smack of back- pedaling. It's the deliberate nature of the relevation of Snape's error, and in JKR's world, if she says it's an error, who are we to argue with basic fact? One can appreciate your steadfast defense of Snape, but the most coherent (yet unfortunately meta) analysis here tells us that JKR wanted us to know that Snape messed up. If you knew what a kappa was, Snape's answer was already odd, and then JKR went and confirmed it. No Flint there--that's an inconsistency within the text, and this is only inconsistent if you're assuming that Snape should always be right. Rather, we're being told that he is not. -Nora generally finds the best thing to do when nailed by a class on a factual error is to admit it with grace, and thank them for their vigilance From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Dec 5 02:50:50 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 02:50:50 -0000 Subject: Asking JKR just one question Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119301 I decided to tackle this one again, asking just one question that might actually be answered outside the books and that would meet my own criterion of not being a "yes or no" question. So I decided on this one: Who was the eavesdropper who overheard the Prophecy at the Hog's Head Inn? Simple question, simple answer, but it would lead to ne knowledge and speculation. Carol, who is as caught up as he'll ever be and will now return to what she should have been doing instead of posting! From snow15145 at yahoo.com Sun Dec 5 03:01:35 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 03:01:35 -0000 Subject: The perils of immortality (Was: Harry's Protection) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119302 Carol snipped quite a bit: I don't know how any of this fits with the power behind the locked door, but I think there's a difference between the immortality (eternal *earthly* life) symbolized by Voldemort's yew wand and the eternal *spiritual* life or resurrection symbolized by Harry's holly wand. Yew trees are planted by graveyards; holly is associated with Christmas and the ancient Druid festival of Yule. I'm not trying to turn HP into an overtly Christian allegory (as indicated, there are Greek and Druid elements as well), but does anyone see what I'm driving at, that the pursuit of immortality is unwise and even possibly evil in itself and Voldemort is in a sense dooming *himself* by his pursuit of it? Snow: I realize you don't want to go into another bout of whether or not JKR has written the story from a Christian point of view, and I don't relish the fact of butting heads with anyone on this specific topic either, but if the books have been written with a Christian overtone how can we possibly divert the topic? As you have questioned earthly vs. spiritual life given the symbolization between the metaphors of the wood the wands were made from, Christianity could very well be significant, as could any religious background that realizes good and evil. Wouldn't you agree that if this last question you asked is true, it would make it even more evident that immortality and its studies would need to be under protection from the greatest power that is known? What else could require more protection than time travel, than the answers to the planets and the stars, than the intelligence of superiority, than even death itself, for none of these are as protected as what lies within this locked room. What could be more powerful or deadly that it needs more protection than the aforementioned? Time travel can alter time to the point of destruction and yet it is not as protected as the force that lies within the locked room. What could be greater than all of these other forces? The force in the locked room could be immortality. If you were to live long enough, all answers would eventually become evident. The negative side to immortality is when it would fall into the hands of someone who could create such a disturbance, with the knowledge that they would acquire over time, that they would reach the enormous eventuality of the apocalypse. The supreme power that lies within the unprecedented knowledge of immortality should be protected by a power equal to or greater than its force. Snow From snow15145 at yahoo.com Sun Dec 5 03:04:10 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 03:04:10 -0000 Subject: Harry's Protection (was Re: Questions) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119303 Snow (me) previously: > According to the prophecy, Harry was born with the `power' to > vanquish the dark lord. Harry already had this power but it may have > become reinforced with his mother's protection. As Harry grows and > questions his own behavior, after the fact, he may learn how to > control this power to its eventual necessity to defeat Voldemort. Carol snipped: "The one with the power approaches" doesn't necessarily suggest that Harry is born with the power. Granted, Harry has not been born yet, but we don't know how far in the future the "approach" is. As I read it, the Prophecy can apply to either Harry or Neville until Voldemort "marks {Harry} as his equal." So the power may well have entered Harry with the combination of his mother's sacrifice and the rebounded AK. (I still think there's more to it, and that his mother placed a charm on him that enabled him to survive the SK in the first place and allowed Dumbledore to extend the blood protection to Privet Drive through Petunia, but I won't get into that.) Snow: You may very well be correct. However you were reading the first line of the prophecy and I was reading the last: "The one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord will be born as the seventh month dies" This does not actually state that Harry was born with the power but rather the one with the power will be born Defiantly room for skepticism although it appears to me that `with the power' proceeding `will be born' has a certain annotation. Snow From annemehr at yahoo.com Sun Dec 5 04:04:07 2004 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 04:04:07 -0000 Subject: A Theory of Rooms In-Reply-To: <3def328f0412011548bd2af50@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119304 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Patrick Jarrett wrote: > In CoS (look! Brand new and using the slang already) we are introduced > to Salazar Slytherin's Chamber of Secrets, which can only be entered > by a Parselmouth in the girl's bathroom. > Then, according to the Wizard cards, Rowena Ravenclaw is credited with > the continually changing floorplan > > The Room of Requirement always struck me as the sort of thing Helga > Hufflepuff would come up with. > > Without any support (still), I am of the belief that Godric was the > first Headmaster of Hogwarts. I believe this because he was of the > belief that any who showed ability with magic should be allowed to > attend the school. And thus under his direction the school would allow > the most new students. As a fledgling school, this is very important. > > If he was the first Headmaster, then it would follow logically that he > created the Headmaster's room. And going by the other three, the > Headmaster's room still has a good deal to show us. > > -- Patrick Annemehr: Welcome, Patrick! Sorry I'm only just now responding, but I'm just catching up here. It's a very intriguing theory. One more thing: the doorway to the office has a brass knocker in the shape of a griffon -- which would make it a "griffon door!" I can't take credit for this observation, though -- it might've been Carol who posted it once; either that, or she responded to the one who did. Carol? Anyway, what could it mean? Perhaps it is a room which is particularly amenable for Fawkes. I'm pretty sure Fawkes will become much more important to Harry in the books to come. Also, if Dumbledore is to ever really give Harry any guidance, we could expect his office to be the venue for talk and even a little magical instruction. Annemehr From moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com Sun Dec 5 04:47:50 2004 From: moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com (K G) Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2004 20:47:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Who's the HBP? (Re: "Prince" in HBP) In-Reply-To: <20041203012803.7802.qmail@web51403.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041205044750.22488.qmail@web53507.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119305 Karen wrote: > I believe that the HBP is a new character, that is somehow related to a known character in the story. Possibly one of those uppity "purebloods", a "love" child perhaps of one of the DE's who works with Harry and Co. against the DE's. It would be an interesting twist!! ;-) The possibility does exist that the HBP could be someone new (JKR is known to introduce new characters to the HP universe) -- I have considered that myself... but I like the Lupin thought better so I'll stick to it for now but I'm always open to new thoughts..... How about Shaemus Finnegan? Isn't he a half-blood? Didn't he say so in the first book? He and Harry did have a parting of ways of sorts in Phoenix.... even though they made up in the end.... Just another thought..... Harriet I still think that maybe some of the Durmstang students will find their way to Hogwarts and the HBP will be one of them. moonmyyst __________________________________________________ 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 imamommy at sbcglobal.net Sun Dec 5 04:53:07 2004 From: imamommy at sbcglobal.net (imamommy at sbcglobal.net) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 04:53:07 -0000 Subject: Surprise me, dammit !!!!! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119306 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "samnanya" wrote: >> What is far more interesting (to me at least) is plotting. What > SUPRISES do you think JKR has in store for us frantic desperate > readers? What plot twists can bring the series to a memorable and > satisfying conclusion? What lessons does JKR want to teach her readers > by the actions of the characters in the potterverse? > > Remember, there has to be at least SOME canon to support a suprise, > otherwise you have a deux ex machina and everyone tosses the book > against the wall.... (i.e. End of book 7 --- and Harry woke up and it > was all a dream told to him by his scar) > > And the thing about suprises, if they are obvious they are not > suprises. Also, and this is important here ..... THEY DONT HAVE TO > HAPPEN !!! THEY JUST CANT BE DISMISSED OUT OF HAND. > Dont tell me that Lupin CANT POSSIBLY be evil since he reminds you of > your ninth grade teacher and HE was a good guy, or whatever built in > opinion you have based on your life experience .... > > So..... what SUPRISES do YOU think might happen? > imamommy Just last night I posted a plot theory that either no one read, or no one liked, because nobody replied to it. In either case, I would really like some feedback on the idea. I contend that somehow Voldemort will lose his soul to a Dementor's kiss, probably while he is posessing Harry. Harry will then be the only person to be able to tell us what it feels like to be Kissed by a Dementor, and Voldemort will be worse than dead. Here is my support: 1. Harry would have to face his greatest fear, and that makes sense structurally, especially from a hero's journey POV. 2. DD did promise LV a fate worse than (physical) death. 3. JKR promised us that Harry would be getting another kiss, but she didn't say from whom. She said it in relation to a SHIPping question, but I think she was misdirecting us. My former post on this subject is #119223. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/119223 imamommy From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Dec 5 05:40:24 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 05:40:24 -0000 Subject: Snape and Lupin's Character Arcs (was: Lupin's Char Arc) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119307 > Pippin: > Harry doesn't attend Snape's class on a daily basis, thank > goodness. And it isn't Snape's goading that humiliates Harry, it's > his failures at potion-making and occlumency, and getting > caught breaking rules. Those things are Harry's responsibility, > not Snape's. If Harry knew he were in the right, Snape's goading > wouldn't get to him any more than Vernon's. Alla: Snape's goading started those failures, so yes, in my book, Snape is mostly to blame for them. Not to humiliate Harry at first class was Snape's responsibility first and foremost. Teach Harry occlumency properly was Snape's responsibility first and foremost. There are times when Harry knows that he is in the right and what Snape says ( about Harry's parents, when Harry wants to warn Dumbledore about Bary Sr, etc.) still humilating and degrating to him. Pippin: Harry doesn't see any reason to break a sweat in the subjects he doesn't care about, and he didn't care about potions. Alla: Yes,Harry does not care much for Potions and Snape can be very proud of himself for starting it, doesn't he? From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Dec 5 05:55:34 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 05:55:34 -0000 Subject: Snape/Occlumency again (Was: Does Viktor Krum become an important In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119308 SSSusan previously: snip. [Which is where I insert my oh-so-not-popular theory that Harry will act the "man" and grit his teeth and work w/ *Professor* Snape even if Snape remains a prick.] > Alla previously: Yes, Susan, your theories are always popular in my mind, but I hope that events will turn out in a little bit different direction. :o) > SSSusan: > No, no, I think you missed the key word "not" in that parenthetical statement! So you would like for Snape to change. I always love asking this question: Do you have a vision of how Snape could change in a manner which would both convince Harry he's "an okay guy" and be believable to us readers? > Or have I misunderstood which direction you're hoping things go? Alla: Sorry, I did not miss the word " not". I just was not clear enough. I meant to say that most of the time your theories ARE popular with me, just this one not as enthusiastically popular. :o) Hmmmm, how would I like for Snape to change? No, you did not misunderstand me, this is the direction I hope things are going. I suppose I can see Snape noticing Harry doing some kind of selfless thing and not taking any credit for it. I suppose I can see Snape beginning to realise that Harry does not want fame and glory and that he is not James. Maybe Snape will indeed want to help Harry to train for final battle. Nah, I guess it smells too fanfiction- like. "Temporary truce" or "frosty stalemate" as Lupinlore put it? Maybe, but I still want more significant change in their dynamics att he end of the series. And YES, I still want to hear Snape's saying that he was wrong for not acknowledging Harry as Harry. I know I am in the fantasy land with this one, but as I said earlier I can dream, can I? :) From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Dec 5 06:06:32 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 06:06:32 -0000 Subject: Asking JKR one question (was: Predictions for book 6 and 7) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119309 > > SSSusan: > Noting that you said just one thing but actually listed four, I'll > also list more than one. :-) 1) Is Lupin evil? 2) Did Lupin fire the spell which caused Sirius to fall through the veil? 3) Is DD capable of becoming invisible? Alla: Yes, I would ask her the first one and second one and insist Pippin to be present too at the time she will answer this one. (I am just kidding, Pippin :o)) I suspect the answer to number three will be yes. If I knew that she would definitely ANSWER any of the questions, I would ask her whether Harry (whole trio, I suppose) will survive at the end. Yeah, I know, not a big chance that I will get a reply from her on this one. From nadinesaintamour at hotmail.com Sun Dec 5 06:50:30 2004 From: nadinesaintamour at hotmail.com (catimini15) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 06:50:30 -0000 Subject: Harry's Protection (was Re: Questions) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119310 Bonjour Kneasy, I took the liberty to write to you directly. I hope you don't mind. In your response to SSSusan and Snow (post 119230 - Sat Dec 4) you say : ?Besides, when thinking of the power as 'life', I can't help remembering the title of the first chapter of the first book: "The Boy Who Lived." Appropriate, no? Indeed. Very much so. This passage from your post reminded me of an answer you once gave me to which I never replied back. On September 30th (post 114258) I wrote : ?Harry is, of course, The Boy Who Lived but on that fatal night, at Godric's Hollow, Voldemort survived too. Could it be that Tom Riddle aka Lord Voldemort is also a boy who lived ?? To which you responded (post 114278 - Thu Sep 30) : ?Well, at GH Voldy was hardly a boy; at a rough estimate he was between 60 and 70. And he himself doesn't consider that he lived, he merely existed. But too many people have pointed out too many parallels between the two for casual dismissal to be a comfortable option.? Like I said, I never took the time to reply to you because your answer was implacably logical. Voldy was sixty-ish at the time of Godric's Hollow(G'sH) and way past boyhood. Also, it is so hard for me to express my thoughts in english that I simply abandoned my idea. Today, I have decided to try to explain myself thoroughly on The Boy Who Lived. I can't help but think of all the similarities between Harry and Tom/Voldy. Like you said, there are ?too many parallels between the two?. I know that Voldy was an elderly man in G'sH but he once was a boy. A boy named Tom Riddle who grew up to be Voldemort. JKR once said that we should ask ourselves why didn't Voldemort die in G'sH ? Could it be because Tom - when a baby - also received some sort of protection ? Given by his dying mother maybe ? Just like Lily did for Harry ? This is what I meant by Voldy being a boy, or maybe THE boy who lived ! Voldy seems to think that it is his work on immortality** that saved him... Wouldn't it be ironic if it was the love of Tom's mother, trapped in Voldy's body when the AK backfired in G'sH, that permitted him (Vapor!mort) to survive, to live, or merely exist ? After all, DD did call Voldy Tom in the MoM (OotP). There has always been something, or someone there (in Voldy) still alive. Merely existing. Could it have been (could it be ?) Briefly-But-Just-Enough- Loved-By-His-Mother-Tom ? This idea could almost be in sync with your possession theory ! Yes ? No ? Anyway... Tom's mum was the second to last descendant of Slytherin (a very powerful wizard). She died giving birth but maybe she was herself a powerful enough witch to cast a protection spell on her soon-to-be orphaned son. I am not too keen on mushy mushy love resolution of the series but I suspect ?les bons sentiments?, like we say in french, will play a key part at the end of book seven. Cheers, Nadine ** Am I the only one to be bothered by the fact that Nicolas Flamel (and his wife) postponed their deaths by six hundred years and nobody complains while it seems a terrible crime for Voldemort to have tried to achieve immortality ? He is an evil lord, a cruel assassin, an outlaw, but why is his work on immortality so reprehensible ? From heos at virgilio.it Fri Dec 3 19:57:06 2004 From: heos at virgilio.it (chrusotoxos) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 19:57:06 -0000 Subject: SNAPE the baby-sitter? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119311 Hi again, and sorry if this has already been brought up. Have been out of touch for a while. Was just wondering, we know that Snape favours Slytherin students (it's not only Harry's point of view; Percy tells him so his first night in Hogwarts, and we see the evidence of it) but what is intriguing me is why. We're told that favouring the students of own's house is not common; McGonagall doesn't do that, and I don't see Snape as someone less strict than she is. We can assume that Sprout and Flitwick are nice to everybody. I can understand Snape (as every other teacher/person) liking to recognize his own traits of character in someone else, and therefore favouring them, but the Slytherins we know about are not very Slytherin at all... Crabbe and Goyle - do I need to argue? The girls - they can't even make up an insult for Hermione at the Yule Ball, and a Slytherin attitude would have been a depreciating glare, not gaping like an idiot. Slytherin Quidditch team - bunch of idiots, all of them. Through them we see how classist they are: no women in their team (Bellatrix is the only we know about in the DE, and Narcissa is finally being introduced to Fudge in GoF, after years of partnership between Lucius and the Ministry) and the richest do what they want to. But their captain is easily defeated by the Weasley twins in Ootp, and they are regularly defeated on the Quidditch pitch, resorting to brute violence in a last attempt to win. Not a very Slytherin tactic... Draco - very intriguing. Possibly the only one Slytherin in his house that we know about - but one in fieri, still very ginger and clumsy. Still, a bay Snape. His attack when Harry was turned is very similar to Snape's on James (but Harry is not like his father...) and the consequences are similar: both found themselves in the air, one as a ferret and the other half-naked...and it seems that Snape enjoys Draco's flattering attitude (cf. Cos, "Why don't you become Headmaster?") So why the hell Snape, so rigid and demanding, is supporting a group of idiotic teenagers when nothing compells him to? I've read that helping them in reality he spoils them and makes them uneffective in war - but I don't like this theory. Even he should understand that Neville's bullying is not making him stronger... And I've read that his task at Hogwarts is to find out who's going to be a DE and to try and convince them not to / or to train them. Could this be? What proves that Slytherin House is the one to produce the higher number of DE? Pettigrew was a Gryffindor...and Sirius says at one point, "Snape was part of a Slytherin gang of which most turned out to be DE (i.e, Lestranges & co.)". Unsaid: not every Slytherin became a DE in my days (the ones where Voldemort was strongest). It seems to me that the Slytherins are an unpleasant crowd, right-winged and Victorian, but we can't assume that all the Oxonian turned nazist, can we? (i.e., probably very few of them did, of course) So why is Snape baby-sitting them? Waiting eagerly for your brain waves... -Chrusotoxos From richard at sc.lug.org.uk Sat Dec 4 21:08:32 2004 From: richard at sc.lug.org.uk (richard_smedley) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 21:08:32 -0000 Subject: Duffers (was:Slytherin House again) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119312 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" > wrote: > > > > Potioncat signed off with: > ... but would fit very well in > > > Hufflepuff and BTW, what is a duffer? > > > > Carol responds: > > Someone who duffs? Seriously, in American English, it means a > really > > bad golfer and consequently a clumsy or inept person. I'm not sure > > whether that's the British meaning or not, but I'm sure I'll be > > corrected if it isn't. > Potioncat: > Yes, I can see it now, dictionaries at ten paces! > > "An inept person" am I last the one on the list to get the joke that > it's "Hagrid" who makes the duffer comment? It's very much pre-war English, and fits in with the genre of the books (English boarding school tales), and hence the vocabulary used by Rowling in the books (but not the films ). In the first of the splendid ``Swallows and Amazons'' books by Arthur Ransome, John waits for permission to sail without adult supervision, which arrives in the form of a telegram worded: ``better drowned than duffers'' :-) Perhaps this doesn't quite suggest to the casual reader that the word was generally used as a `soft' insult, and could be used with some affection, cf CS LEWIS, ``The Voyage of the Dawn Treader'' In modern British English duff simply means broken or non- functional, or not up to the job. What would it mean across the pond in Springfield, home of Duff beer? - Richard -- "Britain and America are two nations divided by language" - Oscar Wilde From naama_gat at hotmail.com Sun Dec 5 07:11:50 2004 From: naama_gat at hotmail.com (naamagatus) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 07:11:50 -0000 Subject: Did Sirius *ever* consider consequences? (was: Trusting characters) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119313 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > SSSusan again: > These are excellent points, Pippin. You may be correct that Sirius > did not actually think this through so much as just believe it was > *right* for Harry to know. It probably is not much in his nature to > do a whole lot of "consequence estimation"... but I do think he > wasn't totally incapable of it. Jen already pointed out his > behavior in GoF, and I agree with her on that. > > As for Molly & DD, again I think you make an interesting point. > They DID look at and consider consequences... but doing so might not > have led them to the best decision or actions. > > So where does that leave Sirius in this OotP moment? Who > was "right" and who was "wrong"? > > I think that in both cases - Sirius and Molly, each side held an opinion that was not arrived at in a totally rational way. However, IMO that is *especially* true of Molly. She is blinded to some degree by their her fears. For Molly, Harry is not only a surrogate son, he also symbolises each and every one of her children, and the dangers that await them. How else to understand her passionate, almost hysterical efforts to prevent Harry from being in the know? I certainly can't see much rationality here or thought of consequences. After all, whether he knows it or not, Harry carrys a tremendous burden. Now that Voldemort has returned, surely it's better for Harry, and safer (as was revealed in OotP) to know his destiny. Sirius is probably also swayed by emotional factors (such as the overidentification of Harry with James), but I think that he does see Harry more clearly than Molly does at that point - as an individual with a right to know, in order to be able to make his own choices and choose his own defences. Naama From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Sat Dec 4 21:17:54 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2004 13:17:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: werewolf vs animagus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041204211754.19268.qmail@web53109.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119314 > > Neri earlier: > > PoA, Ch. 18: > > "They couldn't keep me company as humans, so > > they kept me company as animals," said Lupin. > > "A werewolf is only a danger to people." > > > > Juli replied: > > Thanks for the quote Neri, but my conclusion with > > that statement is that a werewolf doesn't attack > > animals, but he did bit Padfoot, so because Sirius > > was in his animagus form he didn't transform? > > Neri replied: > Your conclusion is one possible interpretation of > Lupin's statement, but another possible interpretation > is that even if a werewolf bites an animal, this animal > doesn't become a werewolf. This sounds to me more probable. > > I mean, have you ever heard about a dog werewolf or > a rat werewolf? Juli again: I guess you're right, although it would be extermely funny to see a werewolf rat. Say Scrabbers (before we knew he was Pete), then BANG on a full moon night he turns into a full grown werewolf. Juli From silviaanthoi at tiscali.it Sat Dec 4 21:22:08 2004 From: silviaanthoi at tiscali.it (anthoinedietrich) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 21:22:08 -0000 Subject: Fat Friar (was ghosts, magicians and babies was Re: Questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119315 > Potioncat: > My curiosity was how did he mangage to train for both. I thought > boys went to the monastery very young to prepare. Or is a friar > a different sort of religious figure? I know a friar isn't a > priest, but I don't know the difference. Silvia now: I'm not really an expert, but I'm quite sure that one could enter a monastery and become a friar or a nun (after some preparation) also as an adult (as it is today, btw). OTOH I think it was common that some boys were raised since early age in a monastery where they got an education, and then most (but not necessarily all) eventually became monks/friars (I don't really know the difference between these two either). Hope that can help, Silvia From easimm at yahoo.com Sun Dec 5 00:39:48 2004 From: easimm at yahoo.com (curlyhornedsnorkack) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 00:39:48 -0000 Subject: Snape's hero complex In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119316 > Marianne: > > Well, I have a few issues with these. Snape, as a kid wasn't > working to expose a werewolf - he wanted to know where Lupin went. I think there is enough evidence for me to suspect that Snape did want to expose a werewolf. Werewolf identification is taught in the 3rd year. Snape wanted to know were Lupin went "every month". I think Snape is very clever and capable of adding clues together. > In SS/PS, > other teachers were involved in putting in place the series of tests > that one had to pass through to get to the Stone. Contributing to a defense plan seemed expected of the staff, as Hagrid showed when he listed the defenses. Suspecting a plot and delving into it was extra work, and only done (as far as I can tell) by Snape. > And, we also have > evidence that Snape had grave suspicions, if not actual knowledge, > about what was going on with Quirrel, but there's no evidence that > he went to DD to let him in on that. I'm a bit confused about why you bring this up, as I didn't mention Quirrel in my e-mail, I think. But, as long as you mention it, I would infer from the following DD comment that DD might have known that Snape was doing something extra: "I do believe he worked so hard to protect you this year because he felt that would make him and your father even..." The key words to me are "this year". Unfortunately, I'm not sure how the issue of whether Snape went to DD or not is relevant to my main argument. (As you can see from my initial email, I don't think DD's reason is Snape's only one.) > In POA, everyone was involved with > searhcing the building for Sirius. Snape was most likely in charge. Snape says, "All searched..." to DD's numerous queries. DD says, "Very well, Severus." (POA) > > snorky: I've always had a problem imagining Snape as a realistic > > character because I can't envisage how a grown man could have so > > much hatred for a child, because of something that happened in the > > past, especially a child orphaned before he even knew his father. > > I think the problem is that something current is bothering Snape, > > and that is that Harry is a rival Hero who is more successful. > > > But Harry has all the glory, almost from birth, for something for > > which he isn't really responsible. It't just not fair, and Snape > > hates it when people don't play by the rules. The degree to which > > Snape seems to fixate on Harry's celebrity indicates to me that > > Harry's fame is what bothers him most. > Marianne: > There's something to be said for this. I think, if this is really > what motivates Snape, it shows a gigantic blind spot on his part > where Harry's concerned. I think you're exactly right. I wonder if what he saw in Harry's mind during the Occlumency lessons will affect him in any way. (A good thread would be Snape's blind spots, but I'm so short for time I can't research it right now! I don't think he has any idea that he's considered to be supremely unfair and nasty. I think he thinks he's being fair. But I'll discuss it another day if no one else has.) > Snape seems incapable of seeing beyond > Harry's celebrity. He reacts to the perception of "famous Harry > Potter" rather than to Harry the kid. Snape may very well thirst for > respect and acknowledgment of his gifts and what he has done in the > past towards defeating Voldemort. He may feel he has never received > due recognition. But, what he doesn't get is that Harry does not > react in the same way. Harry's encounters with Voldemort have been > things he's undertaken because he thinks he has to do them at the > time. He's not doing them to be famous or lauded or recognized or > to get an Order of Merlin. There may very well be a hero-thing going > on with both characters, but I think Harry is much more reluctant to > see his actions as achievements worthy of public praise. We agree here on Snape and Harry. Harry seems bewildered by public praise in general (except with regards to Quidditch - something in which he can take pride that doesn't involve Voldemort history. ) > Maybe what gets up Snape's nose is that he *does* recognize this > about Harry, but hates that, in comparison to himself, Harry's > motives are more self-less. I don't see Snape as being introspective enough to compare his motive's with Harry's. To me he seems very defensive against the outside: it's Snape and Slytherins against the world. Another whole discussion and I haven't even finished my main argument yet! > Harry knows someone is in danger and he > reacts - he goes to save Ginny in CoS and Sirius in OoP. He may be > too impulsive in how he goes about it, but he does it because he > thinks it must be done. He doesn't seem to have the hunger for > recognition and respect Snape has. I think Snape's natural instinct is to run off and save someone as well, just like Harry. When Ginny was snatched in COS, Snape "gripped the back of a chair very hard..." . To me, that sounds like someone who wants to do something, but doesn't know what to do. Also, twice in OOTP, Snape ran off on rescue missions. The first time, with wand out, was to find out why a woman(who turned out to be Trelawney) was screaming, and the second time, was to rescue a boy from a toilet. And he didn't even think to stop and guard his innermost secrets from a known snooper (Harry) who hadn't treated Snape with complete respect in the past. I think Snape has more expectations or desires for a reward after good deeds than Harry. (although Harry also expects to be treated well after what he has tackled, as he ranted in OOTP.) It's evident when Snape is not being rewarded or treated fairly. A possible example is in PP/PS just after he referees the Quidditch game so that he can be nearby in case Harry is attacked again, and Harry wins by almost hitting him while zooming by to grab the Snitch. Snape has an angry expression on his face and spits. To me I can imagine him moaning, " Here am I, selflessly saving that brat, and how does he repay me - he nearly knocks me off my broom". Being a spy must be hard for him, because it involves doing things that he can't talk about, but I would bet DD massages his ego on a regular basis. -snorky (who believes snorkacks of all kinds will play part in a major plot twist in book 6.) From katiebug1233 at yahoo.com Sun Dec 5 02:31:36 2004 From: katiebug1233 at yahoo.com (Kate) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 02:31:36 -0000 Subject: Asking JKR one question (was: Predictions for book 6 and 7) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119317 Moonmyst: > p.s.... If you could ask JKR just one thing, what would it be? > (that she might actually answer!!) These are at the top of my list... 1. Who is on the legal animagus registery that Hermione mentions at the end of GoF? 2. Will you please, Please, PLEASE write Hogwarts, A History? 3. In the MoM battle at the end of OOTP, Hermione said, "You can't hurt a baby!" Does this have something to do with Harry's miraculous escape from Voldemort? Is there some magical protection that babies have from magic? Would something bad happen to the attacker? 4. Will 12GP still be the headquarters for the Order? If not, what the heck are they going to do with Buckbeak? 5. Are we going to see Umbridge again? Was she raped by the centaurs? katiebug1233 From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Sun Dec 5 07:31:05 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 07:31:05 -0000 Subject: Harry's Protection (was Re: Questions) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119318 > > Juli wrote: > > > But Harry wasn't at Priver Drive, we know that > > > nobody can harm him while he's at his aunt's house, so > > > I guess his protection doesn't work elsewhere, I mean, > > > he's been harm many times before. > > > > Geoff replies: Tammy adds: > Dumbledore says that as long as Harry "still call(s) home the place > where your mother's blood dwells" he cannot be harmed by LV. It sounds like he's protected everywhere as long as he still returns to Privet Drive for a short time during the summer. But, it also sounds like he's only protected from LV, not from everyone. > Valky: Hi, Juli and Tammy. Please,if you could, take a look back through the posts on this thread, as I hope you can contribute something more to the discussion if you are on the same page as us. We have been discussing various incedents of innate protection that Harry displays throughout the series and are trying to extrapolate what is the Ancient magic that Lily used from what isn't in the hope that we may uncover some portends or hints stowed in the books. Personally, I hope to find some foreshadowing of the "Power" that is prophesied in OOtP. Are you in? ;D From naama_gat at hotmail.com Sun Dec 5 07:43:28 2004 From: naama_gat at hotmail.com (naamagatus) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 07:43:28 -0000 Subject: Detached?Lupin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119319 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > > > Pippin: > > > We don't? > > > Trying to kill Peter was extremist activity, at least Harry > > > thought so. > > > > Jen: We differ here. Murder is legally and morally wrong. > Extremist connotates activites which are highly unusual and > radical in nature. Committing murder can be a part of an > extremist activity, but it isn't extremist in and of itself. > Otherwise we would see far fewer murders in the world and far > more evil overlords.< > > > Harry indeed thought Lupin & Sirius were wrong to murder > Pettigrew, and he didn't want to see them become "murderers" > because of him. Harry didn't appear to equate their potential > crime with choosing a lifetime of service to Voldemort. < > > Pippin: > But Sirius did, in GoF. "I'll say this for Moody, though, he never > killed if he could help it. Always brought people in alive where > possible. He was tough, but he never descended to the level of > the Death Eaters." Different situation. Lupin and Sirius had a personal account to settle with Pettigrew. Sirius was talking about Aurors - people with juridical authority, and about abuse of that authority. Moody was right to bring people alive, because he functioned as a representative of the law. > > > > Pippin: > > > Failing to inform on Sirius was abetting someone whom he > believed had engaged in pure blood ideology, Muggle torture > and affiliation with people engaging in nefarious activities. > > > > > > Lupin's job was more important to him than Harry's skin, > and if that wasn't choosing power over love, what is?<< There was hardly a conscious choice involved. Lupin had (cowardly, I agree) persuaded himself that Sirius was entering the grounds in some other way that his animagus ability. It is a rationalization, but he didn't *choose* to endanger Harry in order to keep his job (in fact, what he feared most of all was losing DD's trust, not his job so much). > > > > Jen: That's Lupin's assessment of the situation, yes. Harry > didn't seem to view it that way, nor did Dumbledore. Fudge was > told by Snape that the Trio was consorting with a 'murderer and > werewolf,' implicating Lupin by association, but nothing comes > of it. < > > Pippin: > > According to Lupin, Dumbledore managed to persuade Fudge > that Lupin was trying to save the children's lives when he went to > the shack. But that doesn't mean Dumbledore didn't view > Lupin's failure to tell him that Sirius was an animagus as moral > cowardice. Dumbledore may believe that Lupin was genuinely > remorseful over what he had done, and deserved a chance to > make up for it. But there is no text to support that. As Jen pointed out, if JKR wanted us to view Lupin's failure as morally reprehensible, she would have put it in other people's mouths (as she did when DD criticised Sirius for his treatment of Kreacher). > > > Harry doesn't see Lupin's actions as reprehensible because > he's thirteen years old, and according to his schoolboy's grasp of > morality, you don't rat out your peers, no matter what. But it's not about ratting your peers at all. Harry, like most readers, accepts Lupin's reluctance to tell DD he had betrayed his trust long ago. I think you are putting thoughts and motivations in Harry's mind which are simply not there. >He was > ready to drop Hermione for telling McGonagall about the Firebolt, > even though he knew she'd done it because she was concerned > for his life. As far as I understand, Harry was mainly upset with Hermione because she lost him his Firebolt. It was about her interfering, not about her "ratting" on him. Of course, it wasn't fair of him to do that, but if all McConagall had done was to check the Firebolt and leave it with him, he wouldn't have been angry with Hermione. > > > What Dumbledore thought we don't know, but he didn't fight for > Lupin's position the way he fought for Hagrid's. We really don't know what DD thought. We also don't know what he said to Lupin, and what Lupin said to him. Maybe he tried to persuade him to stay but Lupin insisted? Lupin is much more decisive, self- contained, intelligent than DD - so DD would treat him with less patronage than he does Hagrid. He would trust that Lupin can make the correct decisions for himself. Not that there is any text to support that, but then, there is no text to support your thesis. Naama From naama_gat at hotmail.com Sun Dec 5 07:46:32 2004 From: naama_gat at hotmail.com (naamagatus) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 07:46:32 -0000 Subject: correction Re: Detached?Lupin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119320 Lupin is much more decisive, self-contained, intelligent than *Hagrid*, not DD, of course. Naama From gbannister10 at aol.com Sun Dec 5 07:47:35 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 07:47:35 -0000 Subject: Hallowe'en In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119321 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "khinterberg" wrote: khinterberg: > I was wondering if perhaps Jo chose the night of Halloween as the > night of the attack at Godric's Hollow not only to immediately make us > connect with a story of witches and wizards, but if perhaps there was > a deeper meaning. Halloween has morphed from the Celtic feast day of > Samhain, the beginning of winter. This was one of the four nights of > the year when the gods drew nearer to the earthly world. Could there > be some significance in this for why Voldy attacked young Harry on a > night that the gods would be close to the earth? Geoff: Well, Hallowe'en - or to give it its proper name All Hallows Eve - precedes All Saints' Day, which is somewhat forgotten nowadays but was one of the special holy days in the early church. Samhain was a time when the dead were believed to walk the earth again for a night and the idea passed over into the church with the idea extended that it was evil beings who walked abroad on the Eve. So I would see Voldemort - being evil to the core - considering it something of a coup to attack the Potters on this particular day. Geoff http://www.aspectsofexmoor.com From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Sun Dec 5 08:06:38 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 08:06:38 -0000 Subject: Harry's Protection (was Re: Questions) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119322 > snow: > Another great thought from Kneasy! You always get me thinking and I believe I found an almost undetectable play in wording (don't know what else to call it) from Jo. Lets look at the entire statement made by DD: > > OOP- "There is a room in the Department of Mysteries," [ ], "that is kept locked at all times. It contains a force that is at once more > wonderful and more terrible than death, than human intelligence, than forces of nature It is the power held within that room that you > possess in such quantities and which Voldemort has not at all." > > > > In the end my suspicions would be that immortality is the force that can be more wonderful and terrible and the power is `pure' self- > sacrificing protection. > > > > Kneasy: > A different take to mine, but that's not important - working up a > theory that you're happy with and are willing to defend is. Valky: And also mine, Snow, but you your post engages me anyway, thankyou for your perspective. I am starting to come around on the proposal that *Life* is the power behind the door. Or as I see it, The *spark* of life. It is an energy, and thefore a force, it has a generative rate beyond exponential, one would have to make up a word to describe it. It is greater and more terrible than death, and because it propagates beyond reason it is more wonderful and terrible than human intelligence, the forces of nature pale to it because it is their master. Finally, Voldemort is no longer human, he has disconnected from the creator source, in an attempt to bypass it's rules and become immortal. It is possible to imagine that he has extinguished his *spark of life* (which is given by and part of *the creator force*, and so must inevitably return to the creator or *god*) and replaced it with some artificial reproduction, like for example a "complex spellform" constituting him a *life* battery. Only two problems I see with this: 1. This is a very complex plot twist I am imagining, and could possibly take another seven books to describe. 2. Somewhere around the above quote from OOtP Dd says that this is the force that saved Harry when LV was insde him possessing him in the MOM. Inescapably, we know that it was Harry's *Love* for his friend and Godfather, Sirius, that LV encountered before he fled. Unless we are just being chucked a big smelly Red Herring there we have to assume that *Love* plays a part. In spite of the problems, if I assume that JKR is a genius, well I can do *that* easily, and that she can explain an extravagant notion like the one I have just proposed, in just *two* highly entertaining, and accessible to the average joe, novels, then I can explain away the second problem because many theologies describe the *spark of life* eternal force as *Love* anyway. From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Sun Dec 5 09:34:27 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 09:34:27 -0000 Subject: Just one question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119323 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "samnanya" wrote: > > What are the similarities between the two "real" Trelawney prophecies and why are they repeated twice ? Valky: Are you leading somewhere with this question? Ok I'll play.. ;P For me, the similarity I first see about Trelawneys prophecies are that they both are about Voldemort. How uncanny, it could be that LV, being the Dark Lord and all, is a significant subject to the whole of the WW. And so it is in line with what Firenze tells, in Centaur and the Sneak OOtP, that true seeing has nothing to do with trivial matters of the individual but instead gives insight into significant universal events. OR it could be some hidden connection with LV existing in Trelawney. If it is and if that is of any significance I am sure we might find some evidence of the prescence of Voldemort during or before the prophecy is made in POA. Maybe a prickling in Harrys scar or something of the like. The second part of the question, I am not sure I understand. Do you mean to say that the prophecies ae repeated in the books twice, or that Trelawney repeats herself when prophesying? I will assume you mean that Trelawney repeats herself and I think that in the POA prophecy that JKR wrote it that way for effect, to build suspense, and probably because the prophecy we find in OOtP is *carefully worded* and so the repeat line adds a depth that is required for it to be accurate. In summation I mean in POA the prophecy repeats to establish a style- blueprint for Trelawney because, the prophecy in OOtP *has* to repeat. Now I would really like to ask you one question. Why do you want to know? From bboyminn at yahoo.com Sun Dec 5 09:41:48 2004 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 09:41:48 -0000 Subject: Neville's choice (was: ghosts, ...etc... - Minor Point) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119324 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > > Steve/bboyminn (was bboy-mn) (and isn't Lexicon Steve) wrote a > longer post but I had to follow rules and snip most of it: > > > In a sense, the Hat doesn't ignore choice, but at the same time, > > it doesn't yeild to it either. The student's choice does tell the > > hat something about the student, but I think the Hat is more > > likely to consider at what is behind that choice than to consider > > the choice itself. > > > > If you get my drift. > > > > Steve/... > Potioncat: > I think you are most likely right. We know of two students who had > some sort of conversation with the Sorting Hat, and it would follow > that others have had conversations too. But I think the Hat has a > job to do, and it isn't going to be swayed by students or parents or > teachers...and I'll bet Snape wasn't too happy to get all four DE > sons that year! > > Potioncat hoping this is long enough to be pass the "Me Too" > restriction. bboyminn: Harry, or the narrator, says that it took a long time to decide about Neville, but just before Neville, the Hat took 'almost a whole minute' to decide about Seamus. I think when several hundred people are sitting in silence staring at a kid wearing a hat, one minute will seem like a very long time. I would suspect the Hat's conversation with Harry probably took in the vicinity of 30 seconds. So, base on that guess, the Hat either had a harder time deciding Seamus's house, or Seamus argued with the Hat for a while. If Seamus and the Hat debated briefly, I wonder what options they were debating? As a side note, Hermione's sorting was very quick, and it took Ron about a 'second' to be sorted. JKR could have just been mixing it up a bit, various time for various students, or that could tell us something about Seamus, on the other hand maybe nothing about Seamus. I keep hoping at some point, in a very casual off-handed way, the various characters will talk about their sorting experience and we will get a chance to look a little deeper into the process. I suspect this will come up when Harry confesses that the Sorting Hat wanted to put him in Slytherin. Note; in the most recent book, Hermione said the Hat considered her for Ravenclaw, but finally decided on Gryffindor. At that point in time, I would suspect Hermione's desire to be in Gryffindor was very superficial. And, while I suspect she asked the Hat for Gryffindor, I think, in that case, the Hat looked deep into the person, Hermione, and saw something far more significant than her petty reasons. Also, note that while the book indicates Hermione's sorting was quick, it vague about the actual amount of time; quick could be 5 to 15 seconds. To the main point of the previous posts, I think you said it about as concisely as possible, the Sorting Hat, first and foremost, has a job to do, sorting students, and it isn't influences by superficial outside desires. Just a few more thoughts. Steve/bboyminn (was bboy_mn) From bboyminn at yahoo.com Sun Dec 5 09:54:28 2004 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 09:54:28 -0000 Subject: Asking JKR just one question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119325 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > ..., asking just one question that might actually be answered .... So > I decided on this one: > > Who was the eavesdropper who overheard the Prophecy at the Hog's Head > Inn? > > ...edited.. > > Carol, bboyminn: Well, if we must limit it to a question that has a high likelihood of getting answered, then I would like to know the difference between a Warlock and a Wizard. They seem very nearly the same thing, but Harry and/or the narrator seem to be able to make a distinction. When Harry walks into a room, he seems to be able to single out Warlocks from among the Wizards and Witches. Just curious. Steve/bboymin (was bboy_mn) From ejblack at rogers.com Sun Dec 5 13:15:25 2004 From: ejblack at rogers.com (Jeanette) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 13:15:25 -0000 Subject: Fat Friar (was ghosts, magicians and babies was Re: Questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119326 > Silvia wrote: .......monks/friars (I don't really know the difference between > these two either). As far I know monks belong to a religious community where they swear an oath of obedience to the abbot and the rules of the community. A friar takes "minor" vows of chasity, poverty and obedience to priests. A friar does not belong to a community but lives with the people, sometimes serving in a church, but cannot hear confession or preform the mass. Sometimes a man became a friar to serve the church as a clerk or lawyer. Jeanette From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Sun Dec 5 13:43:20 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Sun, 5 Dec 2004 05:43:20 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape and Lupin's Character Arcs (was: Lupin's Char Arc) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041205134320.89535.qmail@web53108.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119327 --- nrenka wrote: > Snape in DADA there is not exactly a model of good teaching, > though. > It's true that he's not narrowed in on Harry, but he does treat > Hermione nastily (it's eminently possible to get someone to be > quiet > without doing it the way he does, after all), probably because the > goal of his class is to expose Lupin. The goal of that class was to give the students the information they'd need to identify a werewolf - which might be necessary to save their lives. As Lupin says in the Shrieking Shack, he set that essay assignment because he knew that Hermione would do it (who else would actually do an essay assigned by a substitute teacher except Miss Super-Student?). And why would Snape want Hermione to do the essay? Because she's one of Harry Potter's best friends - Harry Potter who Snape already found alone with Lupin - just before Sirius Black got into the castle and attacked the Fat Lady with a knife. So as far as Snape is concerned, the old friendship between Lupin and Black means more to Lupin than Dumbledore's trust and James Potter's son's security. So the more info Harry has, the safer he will be. I find the idea that Snape's only goal was to out Lupin to be not realistic. Had he wanted that, there were all kinds of ways he could have made it happen, like being "accidently" overheard by any number of Slytherin kids or by diluting the wolfsbane potion so that it was ineffective ("or was that a FULL cup of newts' toes instead? Darn this fading ink!") What Snape was actually doing was much funnier - staying within the guidelines set down by Dumbledore about how to treat Lupin, he was bending the rules as far as he could without breaking them. I thought it was wonderful dark comedy. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free! http://my.yahoo.com From olivier.fouquet+harry at m4x.org Sat Dec 4 18:56:22 2004 From: olivier.fouquet+harry at m4x.org (olivier.fouquet+harry at m4x.org) Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2004 19:56:22 +0100 Subject: Detached?Lupin Message-ID: <30F7B61D-4626-11D9-BBD3-000A95665DE8@m4x.org> No: HPFGUIDX 119328 >Pippin: > Lupin comforts other characters when it won't cost him anything > to do so... Olivier: This looks a bit like the "no true Scottman" fallacy to me. I mean, Pippin argued that Lupin is detached, I have brought a handful of occasions where Lupin is visibly caring for people and comforting them, especially on subjects where they don't have many other people to comfort them. Now Pippin, you argue that these are instances where he didn't "really" care. Well, how do you define "really" caring Pippin? What are your reasons for saying that Lupin did not "really" care when he spoke with Molly about her boggarts or when he was doing his best preventing a fight between Molly and Sirius? With reasoning like that, I guess I can prove any character is detached. In this thread, the fact that Lupin did not help finding Sirius in PoA has come out a few times. Well, if one accepts the possibility that Lupin could be a Legilimens, there is a somewhat plausible explanation. In PoA chapter 8 Flight of the Fat Lady. "He thought for a moment of telling Lupin about the dog he'd seen in Magnolia Crescent but decided not to. He didn't want Lupin to think he was a coward, especially since Lupin alreadv seemed to think he couldn't cope with a boggart. Something of Harry's thoughts seemed to have shown on his face, because Lupin said, "Anything worrying you, Harry?" " According to the "seemed to have shown on his face", Lupin knows that Harry has met a dog, and Lupin certainly has immediately recognized Black under his animagus guise. Thus, Lupin knows at this point that contrary to what conventional wisdom is, Sirius has no malevolent intentions towards Harry. Olivier From nrenka at yahoo.com Sun Dec 5 14:25:29 2004 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 14:25:29 -0000 Subject: Snape and Lupin's Character Arcs (was: Lupin's Char Arc) In-Reply-To: <20041205134320.89535.qmail@web53108.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119329 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Magda Grantwich wrote: > Magda: > I find the idea that Snape's only goal was to out Lupin to be not > realistic. Had he wanted that, there were all kinds of ways he > could have made it happen, like being "accidently" overheard by any > number of Slytherin kids or by diluting the wolfsbane potion so > that it was ineffective ("or was that a FULL cup of newts' toes > instead? Darn this fading ink!") What Snape was actually doing > was much funnier - staying within the guidelines set down by > Dumbledore about how to treat Lupin, he was bending the rules as > far as he could without breaking them. I thought it was wonderful > dark comedy. Of course, any of those other ways would probably have landed him in very, very deep trouble with his boss--and I don't think he really wants to be in deep trouble with his boss. I don't see that this last paragraph contradicts the idea that Snape's only goal was to out Lupin--it only points out that he was trying to do it in as sneaky of a way as possible to not rouse Dumbledore's direct ire. (One wonders what Dumbledore thought; it would be an interesting question for JKR). He still treats the class rather poorly, and going by any standard of taking over someone else's class for them, his behavior is completely unprofessional. (Speaking ill of another teacher's methods in front of a class is also unprofessional--you will note that McGonagall says as much when asked about Trelawney, and thus controls herself in her comments; that's not just my importation from the Muggle academic world). Which is why I think the kappa error (which is NOT a flint, because it's not a textual inconsistency--it's a direct revelation, and makes perfect sense) is also so funny, when you find out about it. Snape considers himself the Great DADA Master--and apparently he hasn't read the book. -Nora considers about half of Snape's humor to be genuinely sharp and hilarious, and the other half to be on high-school girl level From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Sun Dec 5 14:38:59 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 14:38:59 -0000 Subject: Harry's Protection (was Re: Questions) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119330 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "catimini15" wrote: > > snip> > Today, I have decided to try to explain myself thoroughly on The Boy > Who Lived. I can't help but think of all the similarities between > Harry and Tom/Voldy. Like you said, there are ?too many parallels > between the two?. I know that Voldy was an elderly man in G'sH but he > once was a boy. A boy named Tom Riddle who grew up to be Voldemort. > JKR once said that we should ask ourselves why didn't Voldemort die in > G'sH ? Could it be because Tom - when a baby - also received some sort > of protection ? Given by his dying mother maybe ? Just like Lily did > for Harry ? This is what I meant by Voldy being a boy, or maybe THE > boy who lived ! Voldy seems to think that it is his work on > immortality** that saved him... Wouldn't it be ironic if it was the > love of Tom's mother, trapped in Voldy's body when the AK backfired in > G'sH, that permitted him (Vapor!mort) to survive, to live, or merely > exist ? After all, DD did call Voldy Tom in the MoM (OotP). There has > always been something, or someone there (in Voldy) still alive. Merely > existing. Could it have been (could it be ?) Briefly-But-Just-Enough- > Loved-By-His-Mother-Tom ? This idea could almost be in sync with your > possession theory ! Yes ? No ? Anyway... Tom's mum was the second to > last descendant of Slytherin (a very powerful wizard). She died giving > birth but maybe she was herself a powerful enough witch to cast a > protection spell on her soon-to-be orphaned son. > Ca va, Nadine! "The Boy Who Lived" - that would indeed be a neat, not to say sneaky way of hiding a clue in plain sight if the concept of Life or some variation thereon turned out to be the force in the Locked Room. But Voldy (or rather Tom) - the problem so far as I'm concerned is that we know so little about his early life and hard times. His mother died giving birth to him - or almost immediately afterwards, and then he's off to a Muggle orphanage. Otherwise it's a complete blank. Yet some- how Tom knows he's descended from S. Slytherin, knows who his father is, knows his father rejected his mother and so on. A pertinent question is *how* does he know? And perhaps linked to that - what happened to the rest of his mother's family? More information will appear, I think - mostly because of overlapping timelines. DD, some other members of the staff (Binns?) or even the portraits of past Head- masters on DD's walls, could have known his mother as a student at Hogwarts; McGonagall is roughly the same age as Tom - they could have been at school together. The parallels between Tom and Harry *are* intruiging and no accident IMO. There are hints of some sort of repetition of life events, and when you start to add in 'coincidences' such as the wands made with Fawkes' feathers, their physical similarities and how they each think the other is 'familiar' then we can be pretty damn certain that JKR is up to something. Is Tom a failed DD project and Harry his second attempt? Or was DD afraid that if he didn't intervene then Harry may have become another Voldy? (I keep remembering that the Prophecy says "will be his equal" - it says nothing about Harry being his opposite.) Protective maternal spells from Tom's mum have been suggested before, though with my blood-thirsty tastes I'd think it more appropriate if it was a curse - making Tom her agent of revenge on uncaring Muggles, maybe even placing a compulsion on Tom to seek out the Chamber so that he could use whatever Ancestor!Salazar left there to further his crusade. (The implication ("..it took me 5 years..) is that he started searching for the Chamber almost as soon as he started at Hogwarts. Coincidence?) It's no secret that I consider Tom finally entering that Chamber to be his defining moment. From then on he thinks of himself as Voldemort, not Tom. Something happened in that Chamber when Salazar's heir came to collect his inheritance - I think of possession by a malign spirit; others may have different ideas - but he inherits because his mothers blood flows in his veins. If it hadn't it's highly likely he would have died. He's half Muggle and the Basilisk is hot stuff on folks like that. That in itself is a 'protective spell' of sorts. In a similar way GH is Harry's defining moment. It's what turns him into what he is; protective spells, the Voldy fragment - everything that makes Harry Potter different from every other wizard child. Yet once again we're mugged by JKR - lack of information again. We know the results of GH but not why it turned out that way. Frustrating. Yet JKR tells us this is important - the answer to "why didn't Voldy die?" I think his *physical* body did die - but not his guiding spirit, essence, call it what you will. Most of this is summarised in "Shared Thoughts" 108664. Now if you really want to be devious, cunning or indulge in thinking the unthinkable - maybe it was that transferred Voldy bit that kept Harry alive. There's a thought. If Voldy couldn't die and part of Voldy was in Harry, then Harry couldn't die either. The possible repercussions of that scenario make me hum with pleasure. > Nadine: > I am not too keen on mushy mushy love resolution of the series but I > suspect ?les bons sentiments?, like we say in french, will play a key > part at the end of book seven. > > ** Am I the only one to be bothered by the fact that Nicolas Flamel > (and his wife) postponed their deaths by six hundred years and nobody > complains while it seems a terrible crime for Voldemort to have tried > to achieve immortality ? He is an evil lord, a cruel assassin, an > outlaw, but why is his work on immortality so reprehensible ? Kneasy: That makes two of us. As a mere insensitive brute, romance holds no attractions. Still, if I don't like it I have to read book 7 only once. I can then pretend it ended differently. The Flamels - yes. I can't help but feel that they're important somehow. We still haven't had confirmation that they're actually dead. I did once suggest that DD was Nicholas Flamel's partner and had much more to do with the Stone than being its guardian - he might even have used it. But really I don't think that Voldy grasping for immortality is so terrible in itself - it's just what he'd do with his life if he was unkillable. From moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com Sun Dec 5 14:55:37 2004 From: moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com (K G) Date: Sun, 5 Dec 2004 06:55:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Asking JKR one question (was: Predictions for book 6 and 7) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041205145537.64643.qmail@web53510.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119331 Moonmyst: > p.s.... If you could ask JKR just one thing, what would it be? > (that she might actually answer!!) The reason for the "one question" is if any of us are lucky enough to be at one of her interviews and get the chance to ask. I was thinking about that the other day and was trying to list some questions that I would try to ask so that I did not draw a blank or ask something totally stupid. (not that I would ever get the chance - but it was a fun thought. Also, maybe this might provoke some fresh discussions and who knows... maybe JKR is flipping around the sites - as she is known to do - and might include one of these questions on her next poll!!!) Here are some more 1) Is MM married? 2) Does Hogwarts have a graduation ceremony or do the kids just get a letter in the mail? 3) In the Weasley family, are all the children the biological children of A & M or are some of them the orphaned children of the cousins, the Prewets, who were killed in the 1st war? 4)Just what was the curse used in the MoM on Hermione that looked like a red whip and what would it have done had the DE been able to speak? moonmyyst __________________________________________________ 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 moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com Sun Dec 5 15:10:51 2004 From: moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com (K G) Date: Sun, 5 Dec 2004 07:10:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Surprise me, dammit !!!!! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041205151051.40490.qmail@web53503.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119332 Just last night I posted a plot theory that either no one read, or no one liked, because nobody replied to it. In either case, I would really like some feedback on the idea. I contend that somehow Voldemort will lose his soul to a Dementor's kiss, probably while he is posessing Harry. Harry will then be the only person to be able to tell us what it feels like to be Kissed by a Dementor, and Voldemort will be worse than dead. Here is my support: 1. Harry would have to face his greatest fear, and that makes sense structurally, especially from a hero's journey POV. 2. DD did promise LV a fate worse than (physical) death. 3. JKR promised us that Harry would be getting another kiss, but she didn't say from whom. She said it in relation to a SHIPping question, but I think she was misdirecting us. My former post on this subject is #119223. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/119223 imamommy Sorry that I did not post last night but it was such a good post that I wanted to think about it. I, also, feel that there is more to the whole dementor thing than we are giving credit for. I was thinking along the lines of LV using the dementors in some way to become immortal but have not really been able to come up with any canon to back up my ideas. Yours makes sense. I just wonder how she can work it with: 1) we know that LV is able to pull off his part but how could Harry force a dementor to try this with LV's soul in him when they are on LV's side? 2) how can Harry save his own soul during this process? moonmyyst --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Meet the all-new My Yahoo! ? Try it today! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From foxmoth at qnet.com Sun Dec 5 15:21:39 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 15:21:39 -0000 Subject: Detached?Lupin In-Reply-To: <30F7B61D-4626-11D9-BBD3-000A95665DE8@m4x.org> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119333 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, olivier.fouquet+harry at m... wrote: > >Pippin: > > Lupin comforts other characters when it won't cost him anything to do so...<< > > Olivier: > This looks a bit like the "no true Scottman" fallacy to me. > I mean, Pippin argued that Lupin is detached, I have brought a handful of occasions where Lupin is visibly caring for people and comforting them, especially on subjects where they don't have many other people to comfort them. Now Pippin, you argue that these are instances where he didn't "really" care.< Pippin: You misunderstand me, I think. We agree that Lupin is capable of really caring. But he is also capable of distancing himself from those feelings. That's what I mean by being "detached." When his feelings conflict, instead of working through the conflict he distances himself from the feelings. Nobody was going to be alienated if he comforted Molly, or held Harry back from the veil (that the DE's didn't want the prophecy destroyed is canon), so there was no conflict and no reason to detach himself. Lupin did feel a conflict about whether to tell Dumbledore about Sirius. He knew he should tell Dumbledore, but he was afraid he would lose Dumbledore's trust, which meant everything because, as he later explained, Dumbledore was willing to give him a job. Instead of working through the conflict, which should have led him to the conclusion that Harry's life was more important than his job, he rationalized that Sirius being an Animagus was irrelevant, and tried to forget his guilty feelings about it. If you are right and he recognized the dog in Magnolia Crescent, that makes Lupin's conduct even more reprehensible, because he knew that Sirius *was* using his dog form to get close to Harry. It would be more consistent with his rationalization if he told himself that what Harry saw was a stray dog and not Sirius at all, but there's no canon either way. Olivier: > In this thread, the fact that Lupin did not help finding Sirius in PoA has come out a few times. Well, if one accepts the possibility that Lupin could be a Legilimens, there is a somewhat plausible explanation. In PoA chapter 8 Flight of the Fat Lady. > According to the "seemed to have shown on his face", Lupin knows that Harry has met a dog, and Lupin certainly has immediately recognized Black under his animagus guise. Thus, Lupin knows at this point that contrary to what conventional wisdom is, Sirius has no malevolent intentions towards Harry. > Pippin: I'm not following your reasoning. Harry saw the menacing outline of something which could have been a dog, stepped backward, fell, and the Knight Bus immediately appeared. There was no chance for Sirius to attack Harry without confronting a bus full of wizards, so how could Lupin have concluded it was safe? Pippin From foxmoth at qnet.com Sun Dec 5 16:23:24 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 16:23:24 -0000 Subject: Snape and Lupin's Character Arcs (was: Lupin's Char Arc) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119334 > > Pippin: > > Harry doesn't attend Snape's class on a daily basis, thank goodness. And it isn't Snape's goading that humiliates Harry, it's his failures at potion-making and occlumency, and getting caught breaking rules. Those things are Harry's responsibility, not Snape's. If Harry knew he were in the right, Snape's goading wouldn't get to him any more than Vernon's. > > Alla: > Snape's goading started those failures, so yes, in my book, Snape is mostly to blame for them. Pippin: That is your opinion, Alla. Mine is that Harry's problems with Snape started when Harry started thinking that evil is a Slytherin trait instead of a human one. If you want to blame somebody for that, you could blame Hagrid. McGonagall wouldn't be any nicer to a student she caught talking back or making faces at her. It is also my opinion that Snape is teaching properly, as properly is defined in the wizarding world, and therefore he has no evil intent. What he is doing is wrong and oppressive by our standards, but so was Sirius's treatment of Kreacher. Did Sirius need to be redeemed for that? I don't think so. It would have been wise if Sirius had taken Dumbledore's advice, but he was not obliged to do so. It would be nice if Snape's teaching style were more like Lupin's but the customs of the wizarding world do not oblige him to make it so. If Harry is willing to excuse Sirius for the way he treated Kreacher because Sirius was otherwise a valiant warrior for good, he should, *as a grown up* be able to make the same allowance for Snape. That is where I expect Snape's character arc to go. He will stay in the same place, and Harry will grow to perceive him differently. Alla: > Not to humiliate Harry at first class was Snape's responsibility > first and foremost. Teach Harry occlumency properly was Snape's responsibility first and foremost.There are times when Harry knows that he is in the right and what Snape says ( about Harry's parents, when Harry wants to warn Dumbledore about Bary Sr, etc.) still humilating and degrating to him.< Pippin: Excuse me? Snape was in the right about Harry's father, and has never said anything to him about Harry's mother at all. And it is only Harry's opinion that Snape was trying to keep him from seeing Dumbledore, and highly unfair, since it was Snape who called Harry back and kept him there until Dumbledore arrived. Pippin From hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk Sun Dec 5 16:25:50 2004 From: hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk (Hannah) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 16:25:50 -0000 Subject: SNAPE the baby-sitter? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119335 Chrusotoxos wrote: > Was just wondering, we know that Snape favours Slytherin students (it's not only Harry's point of view; Percy tells him so his first night in Hogwarts, > and we see the evidence of it) but what is intriguing me is why. > > We're told that favouring the students of own's house is not common; McGonagall doesn't do that, and I don't see Snape as someone less strict than she is. We can assume that Sprout and Flitwick are nice to everybody. > > So why the hell Snape, so rigid and demanding, is supporting a group of idiotic teenagers when nothing compells him to? > So why is Snape baby-sitting them? Hannah: Why is Snape babysitting them? Because he is head of Slytherin house and it is his job. Snape is very conscientious. He will do things even if he really doesn't want to if he thinks it is his duty to do them. Consider: brewing Wolfsbane for Lupin. He hates Lupin, and wants the man's job, and even has reasonable grounds to suspect he may be involved in criminal activity. Yet he keeps his mouth shut about Lupin's little problem with lycanthropy. Not only that, but he brews up the wolfsbane potion for him monthly. And then, when Lupin forgets to take it one night, rather than going 'oops, what a shame, looks like old Remus will be shown the door tomorrow' he actually pours a cupfull and takes it along to the man's office to make sure he drinks it. All through the books we see Snape doing things he'd much rather not do (or at least, that is how it appears) because he considers it to be his duty. I can't believe that Snape has a great deal of respect for Malfoy, Crabbe, Goyle, or any of the pathetic, two-dimensional Slytherins we have been shown so far. But he is head of Slytherin house and so he sees it as his duty to stand up for them, and to Snape, that probably does mean being favouritist. And to be honest, I don't think Snape is really exceptionally nice or kind to them. He might be *nicer* to them, and not hand out punishments when he should, and award them housepoints when he shouldn't, but I don't really see him as being caring or kind to them or to anyone. Hannah From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Sun Dec 5 16:25:23 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 16:25:23 -0000 Subject: Fat Friar (was ghosts, magicians and babies was Re: Questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119336 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > > > Potioncat: > My curiosity was how did he mangage to train for both. I thought > boys went to the monestary very young to prepare. Or is a fiar a > different sort of religious figure? I know a fiar isn't a priest, > but I don't know the difference. > Friars are generally accepted as being members one of the mendicant orders (Franciscans, Augustians, Dominicans, Carmelites) who although associated with monastries and abbeys, usually went out into the world to preach and minister to the population at large. Monks usually lived apart in pretty much closed communities. Priests were the religious responsible for particular parishes. Way back then being able to claim 'benefit of clergy' i.e. be considered a religious had definite attractions. It had monetary advantages, tax reliefs and if you committed crimes you were tried by separate courts (cause of much anger to the public as they were considered very lenient and one of the causes of the split between Henry II and Thomas a Beckett). And to claim benefit of clergy all that was necessary was to be able to recite a verse from the bible in latin. You didn't even have to know what it meant. So monks, friars and priests could be of *very* variable quality. But I like to think that the Hufflepuff Friar is a nod to the Augustinian Friar Bacon - Roger Bacon (about 1290 - 1340) a famous experimental scientist, philosopher and alchemist, who is given credit for the introduction of gunpowder to England and even speculated about flying machines long before Da Vinci. According to legend he owned a brazen head with which it was possible to foretell the future. He was also known as Doctor Mirabilis. An all-round interesting bloke. Kneasy From foxmoth at qnet.com Sun Dec 5 16:44:33 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 16:44:33 -0000 Subject: Snape and Lupin's Character Arcs (was: Lupin's Char Arc) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119337 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > Nora wrote: > > You have to love how JKR lets us know about how well Snape actually teaches in that class, though. There's really no other way to read the revelations (annotated to make sure the reader does not miss it) in Fantastic Beasts that Snape, taking off points in the class about Kappas, is actually wrong himself. > > Carol asks: > Are you sure this isn't just another example of JKR blaming the > character for her own inconsistency > not to mention that it's out of character for him to make a pronouncement of that sort without being right. And the Pensieve scene seems to indicate that he really is knowledgeable about DADA. > > Carol, wondering what Pippin thinks on this one Pippin thinks it's only inconsistent if you believe that once a character is established as knowledgeable, he can't be wrong. I think Snape made the same sort of mistake Hermione did with those runes at the end of OOP. He just got mixed up. He probably wouldn't make the same kind of mistake at potions, but that only goes to underline Dumbledore's homily about the things we want most being the worst for us. Despite what Snape thinks, he's more suited to teaching potions than DADA. What I did notice rereading that scene is that Snape leaves Neville completely alone. He also doesn't smirk at Harry when he punishes him, and saves all his twisted smiles for Lupin's supposed derilictions. Could it possibly be that all that supposed sadistic enjoyment of humiliating Harry and Neville is acting? Playing to the Slytherin gallery in potions class, and in the case of the first DADA class, to Lupin whom Snape thinks is ESE? Not that Snape isn't a sadist, mind you, but maybe he has it under more control than Harry thinks. Pippin From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Dec 5 16:58:22 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 16:58:22 -0000 Subject: Snape and Lupin's Character Arcs (was: Lupin's Char Arc) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119339 > > Pippin: That is your opinion, Alla. Mine is that Harry's problems with Snape started when Harry started thinking that evil is a Slytherin trait instead of a human one. If you want to blame somebody for that, you could blame Hagrid. McGonagall wouldn't be any nicer to a student she caught talking back or making faces at her. > >Alla: Of course it is my opinion. I did say "in my book" didn't I? And no, I don't think McGonagall would undeservingly single out a student. nd sorry, but I will continue blaming Snape for setting tone to their relationship in that first class. > Pippin: > > It is also my opinion that Snape is teaching properly, as properly is defined in the wizarding world, and therefore he has no evil intent. What he is doing is wrong and oppressive by our standards, but so was Sirius's treatment of Kreacher. Did Sirius need to be redeemed for that? I don't think so. It would have been wise if Sirius had taken Dumbledore's advice, but he was not obliged to do so. It would be nice if Snape's teaching style were more like Lupin's but the customs of the wizarding world do not oblige him to make it so. If Harry is willing to excuse Sirius for the way he treated Kreacher because Sirius was otherwise a valiant warrior for good, he should, *as a grown up* be able to make the same allowance for Snape. That is where I expect Snape's character arc to go. He will stay in the same place, and Harry will grow to perceive him differently. > > > Alla: > > What Sirius did to Kreacher was undoubtedly wrong, but as we > discussed earlier the only place in WW (as far as we know at least) where house elves are treated differently is Hogwarts. But Sirius and Kreacher are not teacher and student. So, I again don't see the comparison. I doubt that Dumbledore not interfering with Snape's teaching can be equaled with "WW allowes him to do that" Dumbledore can have VERY specific reasons for keeping Snape at school, something which may have nothing to do with his value as a teacher. But I'll tell you even more - I would not have that much problem with Snape's teaching if he treated EVERYONE equally unfairly, or even all Gryffidors equally unfairly. As of now, he singles out two Gryffs and one of them is James Potter' son. I see nothing proper with THAT. I sincerely hope that Snape will be able to perceive Harry > differently too. Otherwise I hope JKR will let Snape be in Harry's debt now. Pippin: Excuse me? Snape was in the right about Harry's father, and has never said anything to him about Harry's mother at all. And it is only Harry's opinion that Snape was trying to keep him from seeing Dumbledore, and highly unfair, since it was Snape who called Harry back and kept him there until Dumbledore arrived. > > Alla: I don't really care whether Snape was right or not. As far as I am concerned, he had no right to say it to Harry, absolutely none. This interaction was not in private setting, so Snape should have keep his opinions to himself, IMO. The Barty Sr. scene may had the result you are talking about, but again that was Snape as sadist at his best, IMO. Harry was not in his classroom, he did not do anything to Snape. Snape saw how upset Harry was and still decided to demonstrate his "conversation skills". From hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk Sun Dec 5 17:02:39 2004 From: hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk (Hannah) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 17:02:39 -0000 Subject: Snape's hero complex In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119340 Snorky wrote: > Would a hero complex explain Snape's actions thoughout the series? I think he wants to be recognized as a great hero. I've looked around > and I don't think this issue has been covered. > > If Snape is suffering from a hero complex, it could explain a lot of things about him: his pride, his thirst for recognition and respect, his actions towards Harry and the Marauders, why he joined and left the death eaters, his willingness to risk his life to fight Voldemort, possibly why Dumbledore trusts him, and why he wasn't allowed to be DADA teacher. (I write "hero complex", a boring old cliche for Harry's "problem", on purpose.) > Being special is really important to Snape. There are numerous > examples of Snape demanding to be treated with respect. Also, the two > people who seem to handle him best, MG and DD, never call him just > "Snape", and insist to Harry that he always talk of him as "Professor > Snape". > > In POA, when Snape is apoplectic with rage at Harry when he find out that Sirius has escapes. A reason given by Lupin is that Snape is not going to be given an award for bravery. Hannah: Great post, Snorky. It was suggested, a while ago now and I forget who by, that Snape has a 'saving people thing'. And I think it is true. Snape isn't a nice person by any means, but there is evidence in canon of him going out of his way to save/protect people. And he doesn't get much (or indeed any) credit for it. Snape risks his life as a spy, but the very nature of spying means he can't get much recognition for it. Suddenly, he had that golden chance to win his Order of Merlin, something he probably felt he already deserved for his secret work of years before, and for his (utterly unthanked) efforts to save Harry and the Stone in PS. Added to missing his chance to get revenge on Black, no wonder he went beserk. I would also agree that his feelings about Harry aren't easily explained away by just the James thing, especially when you consider that Snape doesn't seem to see 'Harry the person' at all, rather 'Harry the hero.' How many times does he state that Harry is arrogant (and appear to believe it wholeheartedly)? Harry is many things, but arrogant is not one of them. Snape sees Harry as a rival for the role of hero, and, possibly for DD's attention. This ties in with the speculation in other posts about DD and Snape's relationship. DD admits to loving Harry (though he does have a funny way of showing it...) and he certainly stands up for him. Maybe old Sevvy feels jealous of the attention Harry gets from *his* mentor. It would also explain Snape's attitude to Harry from lesson one: seeing Harry as a rival, Snape attacks first (the best form of defence and all that). It isn't rational, but I don't think rationality is a prerequisite in explaining Snape's behaviour! And in GoF, in that infamous bit outside the office... why should Potter be going up to see DD on his own... that's not fair! Snape gloats over Sirius because the latter is trapped at home and can't go out and fight for the Order. Maybe Snape is so good at hitting this raw nerve with Sirius precisely because that's how he, Snape, has felt for years. Trapped at Hogwarts, saving everyones' necks through his spy work, and unable to get any credit for it. Unable to do things like fight alongside his comrades at the DoM because he has to be seen to be on the other side. On the night of that battle, Snape went in the Forbidden Forest, on his own, to try and find Harry and Hermione. Not the safest thing to do at the best of times, let alone when the centaurs had the hump over Firenze leaving. Did the poor man get any credit? No. Instead Harry blames him for Sirius dying, when it was Snape who told him to stay at home and wait for DD! (On a side note, why isn't he angrier with Lupin, Mad Eye, Kingsley, or Tonks, who were actually with Sirius - and who he'd be more likely to listen to - and yet didn't manage to stop him going?) I think if you factor in a 'saving people thing,' a lot of Snape's motivations can be explained. Whether that's the one JKR is going to use is another matter entirely... Hannah, who also agrees that the old Crumple Horned Snorkacks are mentioned way too many times in OotP to not get a important role in a later book. Especially as LL is spending the summer looking for them! From quigonginger at yahoo.com Sun Dec 5 17:16:37 2004 From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 17:16:37 -0000 Subject: Asking JKR one question (was: Predictions for book 6 and 7) In-Reply-To: <20041205145537.64643.qmail@web53510.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119341 > Moonmyst: > > p.s.... If you could ask JKR just one thing, what would it be? > > (that she might actually answer!!) Ginger, after much consideration, responds: I would ask her why, when she came up with the ideas for the 4 houses, did she decide to have them each have those specific traits. No matter what she answers, it would give us some insight into at least one of the houses and the people in them, and possibly the founder(s) too. Of course, with my luck, her answer would be "because I liked them". My coupla coppers, Ginger From hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk Sun Dec 5 17:28:27 2004 From: hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk (Hannah) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 17:28:27 -0000 Subject: The kappa mistake (was Re: Snape and Lupin's Character Arcs) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119342 > > Nora wrote: > > > You have to love how JKR lets us know about how well > Snape actually teaches in that class, though. There's really no > other way to read the revelations (annotated to make sure the > reader does not miss it) in Fantastic Beasts that Snape, taking > off points in the class about Kappas, is actually wrong himself. > > > > > Carol asks: > > Are you sure this isn't just another example of JKR blaming the > > character for her own inconsistency > not to mention > that it's out of character for him to make a pronouncement of that > sort without being right. And the Pensieve scene seems to > indicate that he really is knowledgeable about DADA. > Pippin replied: > Pippin thinks it's only inconsistent if you believe that once a > character is established as knowledgeable, he can't be wrong. I > think Snape made the same sort of mistake Hermione did with > those runes at the end of OOP. He just got mixed up. He > probably wouldn't make the same kind of mistake at potions, but > that only goes to underline Dumbledore's homily about the > things we want most being the worst for us. Despite what Snape > thinks, he's more suited to teaching potions than DADA. > Hannah: Weighing in a bit late here, hoping not to get caught up in the crossfire ;-) I don't see why Snape's one little error here has to be considered such a big thing. And Snape said the kappa was 'more commonly found in Mongolia.' Not that it was originally from there (which is what it says in FBawtFT). Maybe it has been hunted down in Japan, and now is more widespread in Mongolia? And he also doesn't say *where* it is less common than in Mongolia either. So technically, we don't know for sure that he's wrong. But anyway, that possibility aside, the guy made one mistake, in a subject he was only covering for. And JKR goes to pains in OotP to point out (via Umbridge) that (from a purely facts-into-head pov) his classes are actually good; the students all learn, and are even advanced for their stage. Although Umbridge is horrible, her assessments of the various staff are actually quite accurate - Trelawney and Hagrid are poor teachers. For instance, she doesn't seem to give MM a bad report, even though she personally dislikes her. Snape also did a good job at the duelling club (what a shame there only ever seemed to be one of those...). I think the problem with Snape teaching DADA is nothing to do with his teaching style (and no, I'm not by any means saying that his methods of humiliation etc. are right in my book) or with any lack of knowledge. The problem lies in his dark past, and, of course, in the difficulty of Spy! Snape teaching defence against LV's main weapons. I still think he'll get the chance to show whether he can or can't teach DADA in book 7. Hannah From eloiseherisson at aol.com Sun Dec 5 17:40:18 2004 From: eloiseherisson at aol.com (eloise_herisson) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 17:40:18 -0000 Subject: Snape's hero complex In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119343 Snorky: > > Would a hero complex explain Snape's actions thoughout the series? I > think he wants to be recognized as a great hero. I've looked around > and I don't think this issue has been covered. Eloise: I think you're right and strangely enough this was pretty much the subject of my own delurk (31259) although I didn't call it a hero complex as such. Well, I'm not sure that I'd actually call it that now, but I certainly think that a desire for recognition is a huge part of what motivates him. Snorky: > If Snape is suffering from a hero complex, it could explain a lot of > things about him: his pride, his thirst for recognition and respect, > his actions towards Harry and the Marauders, why he joined and left > the death eaters, his willingness to risk his life to fight Voldemort, > possibly why Dumbledore trusts him, and why he wasn't allowed to be > DADA teacher. (I write "hero complex", a boring old cliche for Harry's > "problem", on purpose.) Eloise: It would indeed. Snorky: > There are so many issues involved that I'm going to tackle only a few: > whether he has a hero complex, whether it could explain why Snape > behaves so badly towards Harry, and why Dumbledore might trust him. > > The following are some proofs of his works as a hero. When Snape was a > student, he worked to expose a werewolf, and to expell some school > bullies at his own risk. Eloise: OK. I wouldn't exactly classify this as being heroic. I think he had a big problem with James et al and jealousy figures highly in my understanding of that. I wrote back then, > 1) His hatred of Harry derives initially from his antipathy to James. Like > Harry's and Draco's, this was was instinctive. It was exacerbated by his > jealousy of James's Quidditch skills, possibly academic envy (he is clearly > clever, yet James and Sirius were top of the year) the Sirius/Lupin incident > and the final insult of James saving his life. He sneaked around trying to > get them expelled for rule- breaking in the same way as he tries to get Harry > expelled. Snorky: >In SS/PS, Snape is the only teacher who works > in the background to save Harry and the stone. In POA, Dumbledore > relies on Snape to be in charge of searching for Sirius in the > building. In the shrieking shack, Snape thinks he is saving Harry's > life from Sirius. And of course, Snape has risked his life to spy on > the Death Eaters. (The recent message 119077 mentions examples of how > Snape has been a force for good.) Eloise: Yes. He has the wit to know what is happening re Quirrell and the courage to do something about it. Dumbledore clearly treats him as his right hand man and however mistaken he is regarding Sirius and Lupin, he *does* think he's saving Harry. However, as I wrote , > 7) In PS, we have no suggestion that Severus shares his mistrust of Quirrell > with D as he does later of Lupin. Why? I think that he is desperate to be the > one who protects the stone, who can take it safely to D, thus declaring both > his loyalty and his claim to favoured child status. This is why he is so keen > to keep Harry out of the way. And then the dratted child does it again! > Similarly, he wants it to be he who catches Sirius. > Snorky: > > I've always had a problem imagining Snape as a realistic character > because I can't envisage how a grown man could have so much hatred for > a child, because of something that happened in the past, especially a > child orphaned before he even knew his father. I think the problem is > that something current is bothering Snape, and that is that Harry is a > rival Hero who is more successful. >But Harry has all the > glory, almost from birth, for something for which he isn't really > responsible. It't just not fair, and Snape hates it when people don't > play by the rules. The degree to which Snape seems to fixate on > Harry's celebrity indicates to me that Harry's fame is what bothers > him most. The first thing Snape says to him is "Ah yes, Harry > Potter. Our new - celebrity". PS/SS.) Two of Snape's first three lines > are about Harry's celebrity. Eloise: Definitely. In 31259, I wrote > 6) In his dealings with Harry, Severus is obsessed with putting him in his > place, assuming that he will have ideas of grandeur, that fame will go to > his head. I think he is aware, as the Sorting hat was, that Harry could have > done well in Slytherin and fears that Harry himself might be open to > corruption. Even worse, he is a rival in his relationship with D. D trusts > Severus, but he favours Harry. and again in 33668, > I think it is acutely painful for him that 'famous Harry Potter' gets all the > credit for Voldemort's downfall when however much 'good' he has done is > secret. > 'Fame isn't everything' isn't just another nasty remark, it's a cri de coeur. Snorky: > Being special is really important to Snape. There are numerous > examples of Snape demanding to be treated with respect. Also, the two > people who seem to handle him best, MG and DD, never call him just > "Snape", and insist to Harry that he always talk of him as "Professor > Snape". > > In POA, when Snape is apoplectic with rage at Harry when he find out > that Sirius has escapes. A reason given by Lupin is that Snape is not > going to be given an award for bravery. Eloise: And I think he genuinely believes he was right until the penny drops that just as he excluded Dumbledore from what *he* was up to, similarly Dumbledore hatched a plot with Harry and Hermione to rescue Sirius without letting him in on the secret. Not only has Dumbledore not confided in him, but Harry has played hero again and worse *with Dubledore's complicity* Snorky: > Perhaps DD recognized the hero complex early on in Snape, and mentored > him (see the excellent message 118948), (Ooh! That was me! Thank you so much!) >to mold Snape into someone > useful at some point in time against Voldemort. Eloise: I confess that I had never developed the line of thought that far. I think it's entirely possible, though. Snorky: He would be > particularly useful because he was a Slytherin. > > (I wonder if we'll learn something in the future about a prophesy for > Snape, one deeply unsatisfying to him, in which he learns he'll be the > man who helped the man who gets rid of Voldemort. In other words, he's > always playing second fiddle. I also wonder if Snape and everyone else > in the OOTP had heard of Harry's prophesy a long while before.(I've > seen this discussed about Harry's parents.) Snape could hate Neville > Longbottom as well for being a possible Hero. Eloise: Mmm. He could. I think there's more than meets the eye in that particular loathing and have often wondered if perhaps he blames himself in part for what happened to the Longbottoms as I am sure he blames himself in part for what happened to James and Lily. I quoted Rebecca as saying, >I think > after he decided to turn against the DE's he wound up feeing >terrible about whatever it was he did do while he was really with >them and he became obsessed with the idea of doing something >important to redeem himself. If he was the spy who uncovered the >plot to kill James and Harry then you could see how he might >consider this his big chance to make up for his past, not just >because he owed James a favor but since everyone else loved James so > much then saving his life would be construed as really heroic. But >then something went horribly wrong (thanks to Sirius, he believed) >and James wound up dead anyway and whatever credit there was to >take was taken by Harry. I think Snape gets so irrational around >Harry because Harry reminds him of his guilt, regrets and failure >to really help James when he had the chance. And I think he hates >James because James up and died. This would also explain why Snape >is always running into the middle of dangerous situations to try to >fix them; he's still trying to make up for his past and he still >winds up being mistrusted and misunderstood for all his efforts. I (Eloise) replied, > I do think he's really angry at James for getting killed and that >now he > knows the truth, he will still be angry with Sirius for being the > unintentional agent of his downfall. > > Incidentally, he is right, it was James' fault they got killed. >Sirius may > not have been the secret-keeper, but he trusted Sirius, rather than > Dumbledore who had wanted to take on the role. The reason that I wouldn't describe it as a hero complex (although there is no doubt in my mind that he wants to be one) is that I think Snape has very specific needs when it comes to recognition. I think he genuinely wants to be pivotal in bringing down Voldemort, I think he has an intense rivalry with Harry, both to do with the fight against Voldemort and as a rival in his relationship with Dumbledore, I think he needs to prove himself to make up for his past. The whole thing is complicated by the fact that he both needs to make amends for failing to save a man he detested and also has to protect the son who is a constant reminder of him, his biggest rival and constantly in his way. I think he has plenty of reason to hate Harry. ~Eloise From hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk Sun Dec 5 17:52:03 2004 From: hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk (Hannah) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 17:52:03 -0000 Subject: Asking JKR one question (was: Predictions for book 6 and 7) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119344 > Moonmyst: > > > p.s.... If you could ask JKR just one thing, what would it be? > > > (that she might actually answer!!) > Hannah: If it had to be one that she'd actually answer, or at least half answer, it would be: 'Were James, Lily, Harry and LV the only people at GH on the night of the attacks?' She could answer that with a simple 'no' without giving too much away and still leave us all lots of room for speculation. Things I wouldn't ask (and it bugs me when people waste the golden opportunity of getting useful HP info in JKR interviews by asking them) include; 'Where do you think of your names?' 'I want to be a writer how do I go about it?' and 'do you like the actors who play the trio in the movies?' But then maybe that's me being a miserable adult fan :-) Hannah From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Dec 5 17:53:16 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 17:53:16 -0000 Subject: The kappa mistake (was Re: Snape and Lupin's Character Arcs) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119345 > Hannah: Weighing in a bit late here, hoping not to get caught up in the crossfire ;-) I don't see why Snape's one little error here has to be considered such a big thing. And Snape said the kappa was 'more commonly found in Mongolia.' Not that it was originally from there (which is what it says in FBawtFT). Maybe it has been hunted down in Japan, and now is more widespread in Mongolia? And he also doesn't say *where* it is less common than in Mongolia either. So technically, we don't know for sure that he's wrong. Alla: Sorry, but since Fanstastic beasts says specifically that Kappa IS japanese water demon and does not mention Mongolia at all, I think we do know that Snape had been wrong there and as Nora said, JKR goes out of her way to point out that he was indeed wrong, by making Harry write on the page "Snape hasn't read this either" Why is it a big thing? I think it shows again how much Snape's emotions actually rule his life. IMO, he was SO consumed in preparing the lesson which will out poor Lupin, that he forgot to actually prepare for normal lesson. Again makes me wonder how hypocritical Snape was when he was giving that "emotions speech" to Harry in Occlumency Hanna: > But anyway, that possibility aside, the guy made one mistake, in a > subject he was only covering for. And JKR goes to pains in OotP to point out (via Umbridge) that (from a purely facts-into-head pov) his classes are actually good; the students all learn, and are even advanced for their stage. Alla: Yes, it is entirely possible that Snape is effective teacher for some students. I can easily concede that. Hanna: I think the problem with Snape teaching DADA is nothing to do with his teaching style (and no, I'm not by any means saying that his methods of humiliation etc. are right in my book) or with any lack of knowledge. The problem lies in his dark past, and, of course, in the difficulty of Spy! Snape teaching defence against LV's main weapons. I still think he'll get the chance to show whether he can or can't teach DADA in book 7. Alla: You mean "brings the worst in him" quote? Quite possible, if we actually believe that Snape does want DA position. I still think that Snape's applying for DA position could be a cover of some sorts or maybe nor, since Rowling admitted that Snape does not get position for specific reason, not for the lack of desire on Snape's part. By the way, I also agree with you that Snape has "saving people thing" and craves glory and recognition. From asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com Sun Dec 5 19:00:36 2004 From: asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 19:00:36 -0000 Subject: Neville's choice & the Hat's Consideration In-Reply-To: <20041204131565.SM01064@devbox> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119346 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Vivamus" wrote: > > bboyminn: > > > > Ask yourself this, with his definite overriding lack of > > selfconfidence, what are the odds that Neville choose 'not > > Gryffindor'? > > > > ... the Sorting Hat considers a students choice, isn't it > > reasonable that the Hat would disregard a student's choice when > > it knows that choice goes against the student's true nature? > Vivamus: > I would agree that it is reasonable, but so is the SH going entirely > on the student's choice. JKR has not given us enough information to > lean too far in either direction, I think, except that she *has* > shown us that Harry's choice was respected by the hat, AND that > Harry also fit the qualifications for the hat. To support your > contention that the hat really is in control, it was only after the > hat essentially said to Harry, "you could be in all four houses, so > where should I put you?" that Harry started thinking, "not > Slytherin". > > I would disagree that Neville would ever say that he is not good > enough for Gryffindor. I think that is a matter of family pride, and > I suspect his grandmother in particular would be disappointed if he > weren't put there. I further suspect he would know this. > > Vivamus bboyminn: Our positions on this issue are close, but I still have a few nit-picking points. I would agree that the Hat /considers/ a student's choice, but that consideration has more to do with the student's underlying reasons than the choice itself. I would not agree that "it is reasonable... the SH going entirely on the student's choice". As has been pointed out, the Sorting Hat has a specific purpose, it is programmed for one task, and that task has specific parameters. The founders had specific characteristics that they liked to see in their hand-picked students, and the Hat carries on the search for those specific characteristics. /Those parameters/ carrry the greatest weight, far more weight than student choice or parental expectations. So, student choice would certainly be considered because it tells the Hat something about the student, but I can't agree to the Hat yeilding entirely to student choice. Using Neville as an example, I agree that it may have been expected by his Grandmother and other family that he be selected for Gryffindor, but by Neville's own words, he doesn't think he is worthy of being a Gryffindor. That leads to a reasonable speculation, given Neville's long sorting, that Neville and the Hat had some disagreement over his worthiness to be in Gryffindor. So back to my main point, the Hat considers student choice, but only with relavants to what is motivating that choice and what it tells the Hat about the student. The choice is /somewhat/ irrelevant, but the reason and motivation are far more significant. To yield to student choice is far too superficial for a device that has programmed into it specific parameters and a specific purpose. In Hermione's example, we can speculate that the Hat said 'Ravenclaw' but given her previously stated preference, Hermione said 'no, no, I want Gryffindor', after which the Hat replied 'Well then, better be Gryffindor'. Superficially, that would appear as if the Hat yielded to Hermione, but I simply can't believe the Hat would do that unless it saw very strong and specific Gryffindor characteristics in her. So, it was those characteristics that put her in Gryffindor, not her choice. However, (being somewhat repetative), her choice did tell the Hat more than her preference. To be a frightened student in a new school, in a new unfamiliar environment, to be confronted by a complex, intellignet , and strange magical object for the first time, and still have the courage to contradict and argue with that object (the Hat), shows a degree of courage and determination that are indeed Gryffindor characteristics. So, Hermione's choice meant something to the Hat, but it yielded to her characteristics, not her superficial choice. Again (and again and again, [sorry]) in Harry's example, as you pointed out, Harry never said 'I want Gryffindor', he said or thought, 'not Slytherin', that left three other possible House, all of which he would have done well in. Although, I will add that, to some extent, I do see part of your point. If a particular student was dead even 50/50 split between the personality characteristics of two houses, and the student said 'I want Ravenclaw', assuming Ravenclaw was one of the Houses being considered, the Hat would likely weigh it's decision in favor of Ravenclaw. But I add, that, in that case, it would be what that choice told the Hat about the student that swayed it, and not the student's choice itself. Sorry for being so repetative, I know I said the same thing half a dozen times in 6 different ways, but I really feel that first and foremost, the Hat will be guided by it's intended purpose and predefined House paramenters. Only after giving the greatest weight to those parameters would Student choice be factored in. I further agree that this is all pure speculation, and we can't state with absolute certainty until JKR gives us an explanations. That said, the Hat does have a documented purpose and uses documented guidelines, and I feel it reasonable to concluded the 'purpose' and 'guidelines' take precidences. Just a thought. Steve/bboyminn (was bboy_mn) From bob.oliver at cox.net Sun Dec 5 19:07:17 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 19:07:17 -0000 Subject: Snape and Lupin's Character Arcs (was: Lupin's Char Arc) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119347 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > > > That is your opinion, Alla. Mine is that Harry's problems with > Snape started when Harry started thinking that evil is a Slytherin > trait instead of a human one. If you want to blame somebody for > that, you could blame Hagrid. McGonagall wouldn't be any nicer > to a student she caught talking back or making faces at her. Oh, I most certainly and emphatically disagree with that one. McGonagall would certainly correct such a student, granted, but not in the unprofessional and demeaning way used by Snape. Also, Harry did not ask to be singled out by Snape in class and ridiculed for not knowing something he could not possibly have known. McGonagall would never engage in such behavior > > > It is also my opinion that Snape is teaching properly, as properly > is defined in the wizarding world, and therefore he has no evil > intent. Err, what's your point? Ignorance of the law is no excuse. Nor is the fact that many, maybe even the majority, of the Wizarding World would find his methods acceptable. We are under no obligation whatsoever to cut him a break on those grounds. Now, that probably sounds arrogant, judgemental, and self-righteous. So be it. But if the majority of the Wizarding World holds with Snape, well, the majority of the Wizarding World is twisted and corrupt in this context. Sorry. At one time the vast majority of U.S. Southerners believed slavery was perfectly all right. In fact, at one point the vast majority of both Americans and English felt that slavery was perfectly all right. Does that mean that early abolitionists were supposed to cut slave traders and slave holders a break? What he is doing is wrong and oppressive by our > standards, but so was Sirius's treatment of Kreacher. Did Sirius > need to be redeemed for that? I don't think so. I disagree with you there. I think Sirius did need to be redeemed for his treatment of Kreacher. Although, given that Kreacher represented very real malice (and real threat, as it turned out) his sin in this regard is nowhere near as great as Snape's is with regard to Harry. It would have > been wise if Sirius had taken Dumbledore's advice, but he was > not obliged to do so. It would be nice if Snape's teaching style > were more like Lupin's but the customs of the wizarding world > do not oblige him to make it so. > > If Harry is willing to excuse Sirius for the way he treated Kreacher > because Sirius was otherwise a valiant warrior for good, he > should, *as a grown up* be able to make the same allowance > for Snape. That is where I expect Snape's character arc to go. He > will stay in the same place, and Harry will grow to perceive him > differently. Oh dear, I certainly hope not. That would be, to use a very strong word I've used in other contexts, insipid. Purely my own opinion, of course. As for the comparison between Harry's willingness to excuse Sirius and his unwillingness to excuse Snape, I don't agree he forgives Sirius because Sirius is a "valiant warrior for good." He forgives Sirius because he loved him. And as for being a grown up, grown ups are under no obligation, as adults or anything else, to excuse others for their abuse and mistreatment, even if they are on the same side. It is perfectly possible to cooperate with someone for a common goal, even to acknowledge their strengths and sacrifices, while still insisting that the other is absolutely in the wrong in certain respects and needs to make reparation and/or change. To use the slavery analogy again, black Americans served valiantly in both World Wars. In so doing, they made common cause with the white society that had abused them, and continued to do so, because it was necessary to fight a greater evil. However, they were under no obligation to forgive the abuse and mistreatment, and certainly under no obligation not to demand redress and change. > > > > Pippin: > Excuse me? Snape was in the right about Harry's father, and has > never said anything to him about Harry's mother at all. Once again, what's your point? Snape had no right to bring up the subject at all. Whether he was right about James or not is totally immaterial. Lupinlore From antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com Sun Dec 5 19:23:29 2004 From: antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com (antoshachekhonte) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 19:23:29 -0000 Subject: Book Two Discoveries! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119348 Jim Ferrer: > Antosha:"I do want to point out, however, that while the WW may be > (literally) littered with DESCENDANTS of the Founders, each would have > at most a single HEIR. In the same way, Queen Victoria has many living > descendants, peers and royals all. But only one of them currently sits > on the throne of England. Elizabeth II is Victoria's sole heir." > > Point well taken, but VR's official heirs were determined by a complex > set of rules - in other words, somewhat artificial. The concept of an > heir in the Wizard World might be harder to figure out. > > Antosha:"In CoS, it is made clear that Tom Riddle is not only Salazar > Slytherin's HEIR, he is SS's only remaining DESCENDANT, which is > pretty wild. Not terribly good breeding stock, that family. Though, > given their disposition, this is perhaps not terribly surprising." > > Question: "What does the Slytherin family use for birth control?" > Answer:"Their personalities." > Antosha: Hee! As for complex rules and artificial laws, that seems like exactly the sort of thing the WW is rife with. Betcha we get a first row seat in HBP to the working-out of the disposition of the Black family fortune--including Grimmauld Place. Possible claimants: Tonks (as the heir of the next oldest Black cousin), Narcissa, Bellatrix, and, possibly, Harry (if Sirius left a will). From kjubinski at yahoo.com Sun Dec 5 16:56:51 2004 From: kjubinski at yahoo.com (kjubinski) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 16:56:51 -0000 Subject: Underage Magic Discrepancy Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119349 I am just a little confused by the consistency of "reprimands" for underage use of magic. I get the fact/theory that the "unintentional" things done PRIOR to attending Hogwarts cannot be cause for reprimands as many of the kids don't know they are wizards or are not officially using it with any type of direction/studies. However, I don't get the fact that Harry was reprimanded for some things (details in a moment) but not others. Harry received a letter of reprimand when Dobby destroyed the dessert in CoS, would have been in trouble for Aunt Marge in PoA were it not for the whole "protect Harry from Sirius Black" thing and the entire court/judgement fiasco for the Patronus in OotP. HOWEVER, both he and Ron are able to use the "lumos" spell (i.e. MAGIC) in GoF and not only receive no reprimand but have no mention made about it being wrong or not allowed. Are there "levels" of accepted magic? Why? While I agree that using lumos for a bit of light is not nearly as involved (to other people) as disarming them, immobilizing someone, and so on it is still magic that includes the use of the wand. It would violate both underage and secrecy usage. Help? Thanks! From finwitch at yahoo.com Sun Dec 5 21:09:34 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 21:09:34 -0000 Subject: Underage Magic Discrepancy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119350 kjubinski: > Are there "levels" of accepted magic? Why? While I agree that using > lumos for a bit of light is not nearly as involved (to other people) > as disarming them, immobilizing someone, and so on it is still magic > that includes the use of the wand. It would violate both underage and > secrecy usage. Finwitch: 1. Lumos is contained: it's effect hardly leaves the wand. That might make it undetectable. 2. A random Muggle, if seeing that, would probably think it was a torch/flashlight. Therefore it doesn't truly violate the Statute of Secrecy. 3. They were seeking safety, so the 'stressful circumstance' or what ever, IS in place. 4. Ministry was busy with the DEs and the Dark Mark - and with soothing things out - and they couldn't tell who out of thousands of wizards (including the outsiders) did a Lumos spell. Result: they certainly did not bother with Underage Magic. Finwitch. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Dec 5 21:33:54 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 21:33:54 -0000 Subject: Detached?Lupin In-Reply-To: <30F7B61D-4626-11D9-BBD3-000A95665DE8@m4x.org> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119351 Olivier wrote: > "He thought for a moment of telling Lupin about the dog he'd seen in > Magnolia Crescent but decided not to. He didn't want Lupin to think he was a coward, especially since Lupin alreadv seemed to think he > couldn't cope with a boggart. Something of Harry's thoughts seemed to have shown on his face, because Lupin said, "Anything worrying you, > Harry?" " > > According to the "seemed to have shown on his face", Lupin knows that > Harry has met a dog, and Lupin certainly has immediately recognized > Black under his animagus guise. Thus, Lupin knows at this point that > contrary to what conventional wisdom is, Sirius has no malevolent > intentions towards Harry. Carol responds: I don't think we can safely assume that Lupin is using Legilimency here. All he's doing, apparently, is reading Harry's expression and recognizing doubt or hesitation. Harry is misunderstanding Lupin's reason for preventing his confrontation with the boggart (a matter that is cleared up later), but the misunderstanding prevents him from confiding in Lupin--which is just as well because Lupin has secrets of his own and would not have revealed to Harry that the "Grim" was Sirius, any more than he told the full story after Harry heard James's voice in a later scene involving the boggart!dementor. Note his "Yes, I knew him. Or thought I did" in reference to Sirius at this point. Nor can we assume that "Lupin knows . . . that Sirius has no malevolent intentions towards Harry." Lupin learns that Sirius is innocent only when he sees Peter Pettigrew on the Maruader's Map. Until then, he, like everyone else, assumes that Sirius is trying to murder Harry, and he points out Harry's folly and ingratitude for his parents' sacrifice in endangering himself by sneaking into Hogsmeade (a view partially shared by Snape). Lupin fools himself (or tries to) by pretending that Sirius is getting into Hogsmeade using Dark Arts learned from Voldemort, but this pretence ignores not only Sirius's animagus ability but his knowledge of the secret passages on the Marauder's Map they both helped make. (Note that he conceals the map from Dumbledore, as I've pointed out in another thread.) At any rate, we have canon evidence for Lupin's behavior on these occasions and for the motives he attributes to himself. We also have his apology to Sirius for suspecting him. If he *knew* that Sirius had no evil designs on Harry, why didn't he actively aid him earlier instead of passively allowing him to enter the castle and concealing his own secrets as far as possible from Harry, Snape, and Dumbledore? I think Lupin is trying to have it both ways and convince himself that he's innocent, but I don't think he *knows* that Sirius is. Nor do I think we have anything like conclusive evidence that Lupin is a Legilimens. We have only Harry's suspicion that Lupin is reading his doubts from his expression, which is perfectly possible and reasonable without Lupin actually knowing what those doubts are--or that they involve the black dog he saw in Magnolia Crescent. Granted, Harry thinks at times that both Snape and Dumbledore can read his mind and we know that Dumbledore, at least, is a Legilimens (not quite the same as a mind reader, as Snape tells us), but the wording here is different: not Harry felt as if Lupin was reading his mind, only "something of Harry's thoughts must have shown on his face." And that, as we all know, happens quite often in the Muggle world as well as the WW, and if we're a teacher with some knowledge of psychology, learned or innate, we have no trouble reading doubt or hesitation on the face of a thirteen-year-old. Carol, who thinks that if Lupin were a Legilimens or an Occlumens, he would have offered to teach Harry Occlumency himself despite the inconvenience of not being at Hogwarts From tonks_op at yahoo.com Sun Dec 5 21:46:04 2004 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 21:46:04 -0000 Subject: Asking JKR just one question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119352 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: , then I would like to know the difference between a > Warlock and a Wizard. > > They seem very nearly the same thing, but Harry and/or the narrator > seem to be able to make a distinction. When Harry walks into a room, he seems to be able to single out Warlocks from among the Wizards and Witches. > > Just curious. > > Steve/bboymin (was bboy_mn) Tonks here: I don't remember where in the books this happens. But as I understand it a Warlock is a male witch. The term Wizard is the highest level.. warlocks and witches are beginners. Rowlings confuses the issue by linking witches with wizards. Probably because it is too hard to explain it all. Tonks_op From finwitch at yahoo.com Sun Dec 5 21:57:20 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 21:57:20 -0000 Subject: The kappa mistake (was Re: Snape and Lupin's Character Arcs) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119353 > Alla: > > Sorry, but since Fanstastic beasts says specifically that Kappa IS > japanese water demon and does not mention Mongolia at all, I think > we do know that Snape had been wrong there and as Nora said, JKR > goes out of her way to point out that he was indeed wrong, by making > Harry write on the page "Snape hasn't read this either" > > Why is it a big thing? I think it shows again how much Snape's > emotions actually rule his life. IMO, he was SO consumed in > preparing the > lesson which will out poor Lupin, that he forgot to actually prepare > for normal lesson. Again makes me wonder how hypocritical Snape was > when he was giving that "emotions speech" to Harry in Occlumency Finwitch: Well, just to add something: Mongolia is mountain-territory just North of China. Very HIGH places. Himalaya, referred to as the 'roof' of the World. I dare say that a water-demon would NOT live there! And, near Japan is the *deepest* place on Earth-- good crace - Snape got it VERY wrong there... I also think that there are several reasons as to why SS is NOT getting the post, though he obviously does know Dark Arts. 1) He's an addict to Dark Arts. 2) Voldemort got him, so I wouldn't say Snape's all 'that' good in Defence, even if he DID manage to get out somehow. You know, the true master doesn't get there. 3) considering his method in potions: make students drink poison in order to test antidotes, I'd say he might use DA on them to 'test their defences' - and Dumbledore won't allow THAT. Finwitch From easimm at yahoo.com Sun Dec 5 22:01:13 2004 From: easimm at yahoo.com (curlyhornedsnorkack) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 22:01:13 -0000 Subject: SNAPE the baby-sitter? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119354 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "chrusotoxos" wrote: > > -Wrote Chrusotoxos: > Was just wondering, we know that Snape favours Slytherin students .... > So why the hell Snape, so rigid and demanding, is supporting a group of idiotic teenagers when nothing compells him to? > > I've read that helping them in reality he spoils them and makes them > uneffective in war - but I don't like this theory. Even he should > understand that Neville's bullying is not making him stronger... > >... ... > So why is Snape baby-sitting them? I think Snape quite likes being head of house. He loves respect, and he loves to brag to MG about his charges' successes. I don't think he is doing anything to mold the Slytherins into anything less than ideal Slytherins (by their own standards.) He just doesn't seem to have impressive raw material to work with at the moment. What Snape seems to me is very protective of the Slytherins, which is why he doesn't seem to punish them much for doing wrong. It could be that he feels they are discriminated against by the other houses so he has to tip the scales a bit by bringing everyone else down to make things more fair. This thought could emanate from his own paranoia and have no basis inreality. But then, people like Hagrid are saying things like, "There's not a single witch or wizard who went bad who wasn't in Slytherin." (PS/SS) We learn in POA that it's not true and even that Hagrid knows it. Snape has reason to be defensive of his house. -snorky From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Dec 5 22:32:28 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 22:32:28 -0000 Subject: Snape and the Kappa: a Flint? (Was: Snape and Lupin's Character Arcs) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119355 Note: Yahoo asked for my ID at this point and prevented my original message from posting. If this is a duplicate, I'll delete the first one since this one contains small revisions. Carol Nora wrote: > He still treats the class rather poorly, and going by any standard of taking over someone else's class for them, his behavior is completely unprofessional. Which is why I think the kappa error (which is NOT a flint, because it's not a textual inconsistency--it's a direct revelation, and makes perfect sense) is also so funny, when you find out about it. Snape considers himself the Great DADA Master--and apparently he hasn't read the book. Carol responds: I'm still not convinced of this reasoning. If it were *Snape's* error (as opposed to JKR's), Hermione, who *has* read the book, would have pointed it out (or at least cast a significant glance at Harry and mentioned it afterwards). There's no point in having Snape make an error in PoA if that error isn't pointed out in PoA, especially if the idea is to reveal that Snape is less of a DADA expert than he perceives himself to be. JKR has no guarantee that her readers have read FBWFT--many of them probably haven't. I don't know when FBWFT came out, but it was clearly after CoS. It may be that JKR herself hadn't adequately researched Kappas when she wrote CoS, just as she seems not to have thought about Squibs when she wrote SS/PS and therefore has the Longbottoms fearing that Neville is "all-Muggle," which doesn't fit at all with her later conception. Or, if you don't like that example, there's her shiftiness in her answer about "ancestor" for "descendant" and the classic Flint example I mentioned before, in which poor Marcus is held back a year because JKR forgot that he was a seventh-year in the previous book. It's as if she can't admit a mistake and when possible, blames it on the character. So, I'm suggesting, when she discovers that she was wrong about Kappas being found in Mongolia, she covers her own error by attributing it to Snape. You say that this isn't a Flint because there's no inconsistency between books. But there *is* an inconsistency between Snape's saying that Kappas are found in Mongolia and the "corrected" or "official" version in FBWFT, and that inconsistency is just as much a Flint as it would be if the inconsistency were in the HP books themselves. And for those who think that JKR doesn't have any errors/inconsistencies/Flints that aren't math-related, check out the descriptions of Prefect's badges in SS/PS and OoP. Funny how "identical" badges can be silver in one book and red and gold in the other. She didn't take the time to check her facts, just as she apparently didn't check them before having Snape say that Kappas were found in Mongolia. Again, if it were intended to be *his* error, it would have been revealed as an error in PoA itself. Hermione, who is present and has read the book, doesn't even react in this scene and no more mention is made of it in PoA or any later book in the series itself. In fact, I can find no place in the books where his knowledge of DADA is questioned. Granted, he calls in Lupin regarding the Marauder's Map, claiming that he's asking Lupin to examine it for Dark Magic since that's his supposed area of expertise, but that's clearly a ruse since Snape clearly suspects Lupin as one of the makers of the tricky piece of parchment.) In addition, if we're considering levels of "canonicity," surely what's in the HP series itself trumps information contained in works outside the series, just as that information would trump the hasty and sometimes inaccurate responses that appear on her website (Colin Creevey's camera, for example). I almost wish that site had not been set up, but that's a topic for another forum. I don't want to detract from my main point, which is that the Kappa error may be JKR's rather than Snape's and is not sufficient evidence that he's not as qualified as a DADA expert as the Pensieve scene, showing his detailed and painstaking answers on the DADA OWL, suggests he already was at an early age. Carol, wondering if Nora can provide evidence *from the HP books themselves* to support her view that the FBWFT text should take precedence over PoA in this instance From easimm at yahoo.com Sun Dec 5 22:07:08 2004 From: easimm at yahoo.com (curlyhornedsnorkack) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 22:07:08 -0000 Subject: SNAPE the baby-sitter? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119356 Wrote Chrusotoxos: > Was just wondering, we know that Snape favours Slytherin students .... > So why the hell Snape, so rigid and demanding, is supporting a group of idiotic teenagers when nothing compells him to? > > I've read that helping them in reality he spoils them and makes them > uneffective in war - but I don't like this theory. Even he should > understand that Neville's bullying is not making him stronger... > >... ... > So why is Snape baby-sitting them? I think Snape quite likes being head of house. He loves respect, and he loves to brag to MG about his charges' successes. I don't think he is doing anything to mold the Slytherins into anything less than ideal Slytherins (by their own standards.) He just doesn't seem to have impressive raw material to work with at the moment. What Snape seems to me is very protective of the Slytherins, which is why he doesn't seem to punish them much for doing wrong. It could be that he feels they are discriminated against by the other houses so he has to tip the scales a bit by bringing everyone else down to make things more fair. This thought could emanate from his own paranoia and have no basis inreality. But then, people like Hagrid are saying things like, "There's not a single witch or wizard who went bad who wasn't in Slytherin." (PS/SS) We learn in POA that it's not true and even that Hagrid knows it. Snape has reason to be defensive of his house. -snorky From nienna_anwamane at ntlworld.com Sun Dec 5 22:22:27 2004 From: nienna_anwamane at ntlworld.com (nienna_anwamane) Date: Sun, 5 Dec 2004 22:22:27 -0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Underage Magic Discrepancy References: Message-ID: <014901c4db18$e8be4c20$e14dfea9@talyn> No: HPFGUIDX 119357 kjubinski: > Are there "levels" of accepted magic? Why? While I agree that using > lumos for a bit of light is not nearly as involved (to other people) > as disarming them, immobilizing someone, and so on it is still magic > that includes the use of the wand. It would violate both underage and > secrecy usage. Where the spell is cast can also be factored in. During the GOF scene they were surrounded by magic can the MOM tell the difference from an underage of of age spell caster with all of that flying around? Or are muggle born homes more closely monitored incase of magic being used? "nienna_anwamane" From nrenka at yahoo.com Sun Dec 5 23:10:10 2004 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 23:10:10 -0000 Subject: Snape and the Kappa: a Flint? (Was: Snape and Lupin's Character Arcs) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119358 > Carol responds: > I'm still not convinced of this reasoning. If it were *Snape's* > error (as opposed to JKR's), Hermione, who *has* read the book, > would have pointed it out (or at least cast a significant glance at > Harry and mentioned it afterwards). Argument from absence is generally not a terribly strong argument, I would say (as a general point throughout all the books). If you want to take that tack, I can prove all kinds of things with it. Hermione's pretty much been beaten down in class by now. One could equally well argue that she notices it, but it's simply not mentioned in the text. We get nowhere from absence. > There's no point in having Snape make an error in PoA if that error > isn't pointed out in PoA, especially if the idea is to reveal that > Snape is less of a DADA expert than he perceives himself to be. JKR > has no guarantee that her readers have read FBWFT--many of them > probably haven't. Sure there is. We continually have to re-evaluate what we think we know in light of new revelations and information. For those who go forth and buy the book for charity, there's an amusing little tidbit that may make them go oh, or, for the savvy, make them go "I knew it!" > So, I'm suggesting, when she discovers that she was wrong about > Kappas being found in Mongolia, she covers her own error by > attributing it to Snape. > > You say that this isn't a Flint because there's no inconsistency > between books. But there *is* an inconsistency between Snape's > saying that Kappas are found in Mongolia and the "corrected" > or "official" version in FBWFT, and that inconsistency is just as > much a Flint as it would be if the inconsistency were in the HP > books themselves. This is just plain not a flint, and there is no way it can be twisted into being one. A flint is something where it clearly doesn't make sense, and is usually involving some objective fact--for instance, it is corroborated a number of places as to what Marcus Flint's year is. There is no positive statement about Kappas but Snape's assertion, so this is clearly not a piece of information like Marcus Flint's age. Again, it only rings false if you assumed that Snape was for sure right in the first place. This assumption seems to stem from the perception that well, Snape is always right. This is, given this new information and other occurrences in the text, not a justified assumption. JKR's explanation is that Snape is wrong. If you knew your folklore, Snape's comment was always a little questionable. Now, in many cases she's winging it with the folklore, but she hasn't done anything utterly wild with national attributions. It makes thematic sense, if you think about it, too. What does it gain in characterization (which is in part the intended aspect) is poking fun at Snape who is often supremely and utterly confident that he knows what is right, and often unwilling to listen to others. This is canonical--I'm thinking of his convinctions, absolutely solid, that Harry is arrogant and fame-seeking, and his "Shut up you foolish girl!" directed at Hermione, when she dares to try to interject statements in BOTH the Shack and the Hospital Wing. But from a text-only POV, it honestly doesn't matter whether JKR is covering her own mistake by blaming it on Snape--we now know, from her own pen, that Kappas come from Japan (as they always did) and Snape was wrong. Ergo, he is wrong. By the way, kappas are fairly well-known as to their location. I think it's frankly more than a little defensive to assume so solidly that JKR messed up her research than to note that a character may have gotten something wrong. > Carol, wondering if Nora can provide evidence *from the HP books > themselves* to support her view that the FBWFT text should take > precedence over PoA in this instance Hey, I have the author on my side in this one. FB is issued by her as the schoolbook that Harry et. al. were using for that class, and is thus a fairly clear supplement to canon. Therefore, we can reasonably read it as a source of information about the material being discussed in class. She does things like this all the time, where we have to re-think things we 'thought' we knew in light of new information. If you'd like to argue with JKR for making Snape make mistakes, go right ahead. (You also might argue with her for making him greasy- haired.) But being as she is the one creating the world and giving out the information, there are many more reasons to assume that she is right than to cast doubt upon her information because it causes a result that you personally are unhappy with. I fail to see how the desire to excuse Snape from any mistakes overrides the basic issue that we've been given information which makes us rethink our position. This is also an authorial confirmation of a fact, not an interpretation of a character. It doesn't strike me as healthy to want to deny author given plain old factual information (which is in the same class as middle names and all that) just because it's not necessarily positive for a character. -Nora wonders if Carol can provide evidence from the HP books that Snape should always be taken as an absolute master in his field and all other aspects and never makes mistakes From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Dec 5 23:41:43 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 23:41:43 -0000 Subject: The kappa mistake (was Re: Snape and Lupin's Character Arcs) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119359 Finwitch wrote: > > I also think that there are several reasons as to why SS is NOT > getting the post, though he obviously does know Dark Arts. > > 1) He's an addict to Dark Arts. > > 2) Voldemort got him, so I wouldn't say Snape's all 'that' good in > Defence, even if he DID manage to get out somehow. You know, the true master doesn't get there. > > 3) considering his method in potions: make students drink poison in > order to test antidotes, I'd say he might use DA on them to 'test > their defences' - and Dumbledore won't allow THAT. Carol responds, point by point: 1) We have only Sirius Black's word that Snape is addicted to the Dark Arts. Black may or may not be right, but as he hates Snape, he's not exactly an objective witness. We need to wait and see on this one. (Dumbledore no doubt has a variety of reasons for not giving Snape the DADA post, as he does for everything else, and I don't doubt that Snape's DE past is one of them. So, however, is Snape's extensive knowledge of potions.) 2) I don't see how DADA relates to his joining the DEs, which he no doubt *wanted* to do. He was very young, his older Slytherin friends were already DEs and may have exerted some influence, and as recent posts have established or reiterated, he craved recognition, which seems to have been denied him at Hogwarts. (Despite his intelligence and probable high scores on his DADA and Potions OWLs, at the least, his enemy James Potter became Head Boy. That may well have been the last straw for a young and frustrated Severus.) In any case, its unlikely that he would have fought the chance to actively support the pureblood cause and join his old friends, and he may have been bribed or seduced with promises of fame and fortune for his potions skills. Whatever the case, he wasn't fighting Unforgiveable Curses or protecting himself from poisons or dark creatures. He was joining his (preceived) friends and fellow Slytherins against his natural enemies. 3) We have no proof or even solid evidence that Snape really intended to make the students drink potions to test their antidotes. That's merely Harry's perception, and as he's taken out of class for the wand weighing ceremony, we don't get to see what really happened in the class. It is extremely unlikely that Snape, who never uses physical punishment or magic to punish students (with the exception of a temporary loss of control when Harry sneaked a look in the Pensieve) would poison a student to test his antidote. He would be risking not only his job but a prison sentence in Azkaban. Like his threats of expulsion for Harry and Ron (which he well knows he has no authority to carry out as he's not their head of house), this suggestion of possible poisoning to test an antidote can't, IMO, be taken as a serious possibility. BTW, we *do* have an example of a teacher who used Dark Arts on the students and got away with it: Crouch!Moody. I'm still not sure whether Dumbledore authorized that one or whether C!M was lying. I do agree that DD wouldn't allow *Snape* to use Dark arts on the students, but he wouldn't allow him to do it, either. Nor, IMO, would Snape really do it, with or without permission. Snape is too intelligent, and has too great an interest in his own self-preservation, to use a teaching method that could result in the death, or even the temporary poisoning and real physical suffering, of a student. The students would write home to their parents, and that would be the end of Snape's career, both as Hogwarts teacher and Order member. And there would go all chance of doing whatever he's trying to do to defeat Voldemort. Carol From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Dec 6 00:14:07 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 00:14:07 -0000 Subject: Snape and the Kappa: a Flint? (Was: Snape and Lupin's Character Arcs) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119360 > Carol responds: I'm still not convinced of this reasoning. If it were *Snape's* error (as opposed to JKR's), Hermione, who *has* read the book, would have > pointed it out (or at least cast a significant glance at Harry and > mentioned it afterwards). Alla: Nope, I disagree. Hermione is not obligated to correct EVERY single mistake which teacher makes in the books. Carol: > So, I'm suggesting, when she discovers that she was wrong about Kappas being found in Mongolia, she covers her own error by attributing it to Snape. Alla: I offer alternate explanation. Snape screwed up. He CAN make mistakes sometimes. Carol: In addition, if we're considering levels of "canonicity," surely what's in the HP series itself trumps information contained in works outside the series, just as that information would trump the hasty and sometimes inaccurate responses that appear on her website (Colin Creevey's camera, for example). Alla: What Nora said. Fantastic beasts is canon too From gbannister10 at aol.com Mon Dec 6 00:21:24 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 00:21:24 -0000 Subject: Underage Magic Discrepancy In-Reply-To: <014901c4db18$e8be4c20$e14dfea9@talyn> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119361 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nienna_anwamane" wrote: > > kjubinski: > > Are there "levels" of accepted magic? Why? While I agree that > using > > lumos for a bit of light is not nearly as involved (to other people) > > as disarming them, immobilizing someone, and so on it is still magic > > that includes the use of the wand. It would violate both underage > and > > secrecy usage. > nienna_anwamane: > Where the spell is cast can also be factored in. During the GOF scene they were surrounded by magic can the MOM tell the difference from an underage of of age spell caster with all of that flying around? Or are muggle born homes more closely monitored incase of magic being used? Geoff: I sometimes wonder whether Privet Drive is more closely monitored than other places because Harry is there, not to catch him out but originally for his security. The three instances quoted - the hover charm, the "accidental magic" involving Aunt Marge and the Expecto Patronum - were events where only one spell was cast. Other cases, as you suggest may have been where other people were involved and I pointed out in message 109949 that Harry's attempted casting of a Cruciatus curse at the Ministry battle in OOTP was masked by the background of so many other wizards casting various spells at the same time. Geoff http://www.aspectsofexmoor.com Exmoor National Park views, walks and West Somerset Railway steam and diesel views From dontask2much at yahoo.com Mon Dec 6 00:23:43 2004 From: dontask2much at yahoo.com (charme) Date: Sun, 5 Dec 2004 19:23:43 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Asking JKR one question (was: Predictions for book 6 and 7) References: Message-ID: <027e01c4db29$d88c4530$6701a8c0@MITRE.ORG> No: HPFGUIDX 119362 > > Moonmyst: >> > > p.s.... If you could ask JKR just one thing, what would it be? >> > > (that she might actually answer!!) >> > Hannah: If it had to be one that she'd actually answer, or at least > half answer, it would be: 'Were James, Lily, Harry and LV the only > people at GH on the night of the attacks?' > > She could answer that with a simple 'no' without giving too much > away and still leave us all lots of room for speculation. > > Things I wouldn't ask (and it bugs me when people waste the golden > opportunity of getting useful HP info in JKR interviews by asking > them) include; 'Where do you think of your names?' 'I want to be a > writer how do I go about it?' and 'do you like the actors who play > the trio in the movies?' But then maybe that's me being a miserable > adult fan :-) > > Hannah charme: How about this one: Has DD used a time turner??? I think the answer to that would lead to our ruthless speculation about what he used the TT *for*. And it might lead us toward whether DD truly knows more about everything with Harry and LV as some think he does. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Dec 6 01:12:39 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 01:12:39 -0000 Subject: Snape and Lupin's Character Arcs (was: Lupin's Char Arc) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119363 Lupinlore: Err, what's your point? Ignorance of the law is no excuse. Nor is the fact that many, maybe even the majority, of the Wizarding World would find his methods acceptable. We are under no obligation whatsoever to cut him a break on those grounds. Now, that probably sounds arrogant, judgemental, and self-righteous. So be it. But if the majority of the Wizarding World holds with Snape, well, the majority of the Wizarding World is twisted and corrupt in this context. Sorry. At one time the vast majority of U.S. Southerners believed slavery was perfectly all right. In fact, at one point the vast majority of both Americans and English felt that slavery was perfectly all right. Does that mean that early abolitionists were supposed to cut slave traders and slave holders a break . Alla: I do agree with you, Lupinlore, but for a bit different reasons. IF I were convinced that JKR writes the tale about the world with morality, which completely alien to ours, I may be inclined to cut Snape a litte bit more slack, the thing is I don't. First and foremost - muggleborn witches and wisards come to WW from muggle world. It is VERY hard for me to believe that their morality changes drastically when they come to WW. JKR's morality is bound to manifest itself in some shape or form and her morality is also ours. There are many ugly things in WW (to the point when I wondered earlier whether such society is indeed worth saving), but i also believe that JKR wants to do a VERY radical shake up of such society at the end. In what form, I am not sure. Going back to teaching - well, there is MUST be a reason that JKR introduced Lupin's lessons and showed to us that Lupin is better teacher than Snape, so my striking suspicion is that she likes Lupin style teachers more than Snape ones. Since such teachers do exist in WW, so we can hope that at the end their syle will be more accepted in the schools than what Snape does. I also agree with you that something which was right for society at one point of its development will not necessarily be right thing to do for such society later in time. From profwildflower at mindspring.com Mon Dec 6 01:43:55 2004 From: profwildflower at mindspring.com (whimsyflower) Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 01:43:55 -0000 Subject: Voldermort's "death" Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119364 Like others, I have had JKR's question about why didn't LV die when his AK curse rebounded onto him in PS/SS rolling around in my head. The other day I was listening to PS/SS, and heard, in a new way, Dumbledore's telling Harry, "not being truly alive, he (LV) cannot be killed." (p. 298, PS/SS, US edition). So Voldy wasn't "truly alive" from the very beginning. I've enjoyed and learned from Inkling's and Naama's excellent posts on the question of LV's being "alive," messages 110131 and 110260, respectively. I'm also remembering a post from 2003 that I've not been able to find again about the Welsh tradition of sin eaters. My memory is that sin eaters somehow atone for a person's sin(s) so the person, him/herself, doesn't have to atone for them. In a parrallel fashion, might the DEs somehowatone for LV's death to keep him alive? Or keep him in a state between lifeand death? I've spent some time musing on what it would take to kill LV, but then I looked at the prophecy again. It does not actually say that Harry has thepower to kill LV. After Harry heard the prophecy in OOP, Harry assumed it meant he would have to kill LV, but the prophecy actually says Harry has the power to "vanquish" LV. What if vanquishing does not mean killing, but somehow redeeming? or emptying of evil? I wonder if somehow Harry forgivesLV or sees some good in him, and because Harry does so, LV is vanquished or looses his power or becomes impotent or is rendered no longer evil? Alas, many more questions than answers, but I would love to hear others' thoughts on these possibilities. Wildflower From easimm at yahoo.com Mon Dec 6 00:25:09 2004 From: easimm at yahoo.com (curlyhornedsnorkack) Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 00:25:09 -0000 Subject: Snape's hero complex In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119365 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "eloise_herisson" wrote: > > Snorky: > > Would a hero complex explain Snape's actions thoughout the > > series? I think he wants to be recognized as a great hero. > > I've looked around and I don't think this issue has been > > covered. > > Eloise: > I think you're right and strangely enough this was pretty much the > subject of my own delurk (31259) although I didn't call it a hero > complex as such. Well, I'm not sure that I'd actually call it that > now, but I certainly think that a desire for recognition is a huge > part of what motivates him. Snorky: Your delurk was excellent, but (I hope you don't mind reminders of your age) it was several books ago. I first got the idea reading messages on Harry's hero complex, which was really starting to be discussed after the publication of OOTP, and thought - "wait, what about Snape's hero complex"? Recently I've seen several messages in which people are still trying to make sense of Snape. I think this discussion will continue to pop up. > > Snorky: > > The following are some proofs of his works as a hero. When Snape > > was a student, he worked to expose a werewolf, and to expell some > > school bullies at his own risk. > > Eloise: > OK. I wouldn't exactly classify this as being heroic. I think he > had a big problem with James et al and jealousy figures highly in > my understanding of that.... Snorky: Yes, but he could have other (more heroic) motives as well, and a lot of what we hear about his jealousy is secondhand. Snape at the time was doing his best to be top dog, and perhaps top dog James didn't like the competition either and was hostile. And the views of Snape are given by people who possibly were afraid that Snape would prove himself the better man. It would be pretty embarrassing for a hot shot like James (I assume he had better clothes and possibly higher social status than Snape) to be bested by a poor nobody like Snape. > Eloise: > ...In PS, we have no suggestion that Severus shares his mistrust > of Quirrell with D as he does later of Lupin. Why? I think that > he is desperate to be the one who protects the stone, who can > take it safely to D, thus declaring both his loyalty and his > claim to favoured child status. This is why he is so keen to keep > Harry out of the way. And then the dratted child does it again! > Similarly, he wants it to be he who catches Sirius. Snorky: It's possible, but he still risks his life in PS/SS (the dog biting incident, taking on Quirrell in the forest), and it seems a bit too much to risk for proof of loyalty and favoured child status. I don't see why he would risk so much at this point in his life, when DD doesn't even really talk much to Harry, and Snape's loyalty doesn't seem to be doubted by DD. > Eloise: > 6) In his dealings with Harry, Severus is obsessed with putting > him in his place, assuming that he will have ideas of grandeur, > that fame will go to his head. I think he is aware, as the Sorting > hat was, that Harry could have done well in Slytherin and fears that > Harry himself might be open to corruption. Even worse, he is a rival > in his relationship with D. D trusts Severus, but he favours Harry. Are you saying that Snape is doing the above (putting him in his place, etcetera) to save Harry from corruption? Also, I'm not sure that DD doesn't love Severus almost as much as a son. (In case you're curious, I don't like Snape in general.) > Eloise: > and again in 33668, > > I think it is acutely painful for him that 'famous Harry Potter' > > gets all the credit for Voldemort's downfall when however much > > 'good' he has done is secret. > > 'Fame isn't everything' isn't just another nasty remark, it's a > > cri de coeur. Snorky: Yes, 'Fame isn't everything' is a big clue. I think fame is on Snape's brain because Harry has it, and he doesn't, yet they are both heros. > >Snorky: > > > > > In POA, when Snape is apoplectic with rage at Harry when he finds > > out that Sirius has escaped. A reason given by Lupin is that Snape > > is not going to be given an award for bravery. > Eloise: > And I think he genuinely believes he was right until the penny > drops that just as he excluded Dumbledore from what *he* was up to, > similarly Dumbledore hatched a plot with Harry and Hermione to > rescue Sirius without letting him in on the secret. Not only has > Dumbledore not confided in him, but Harry has played hero again and > worse *with Dumbledore's complicity* Snorky: Perhaps Snape and DD understand each others' limitations. Snape thinks Dumbledore falls for sob stories, Dumbledore doesn't trust Snape's judgment when it comes to controlling his emotions regarding an enemy. > Snorky: > > ( I also wonder if Snape and everyone else in the OOTP had > > heard of Harry's prophecy a long while before. (I've seen this > > discussed about Harry's parents.) Snape could hate Neville > > Longbottom as well for being a possible Hero. > > Eloise: > Mmm. He could. I think there's more than meets the eye in that > particular loathing and have often wondered if perhaps he blames > himself in part for what happened to the Longbottoms as I am sure > he blames himself in part for what happened to James and Lily. Yes. In POA Snape blames James's arrogance for ignoring Snape's warnings about Sirius. Snape would have loved to have saved James. > Eloise: > I quoted Rebecca as saying, > > >I think after he decided to turn against the DEs he wound up feeling > >terrible about whatever it was he did do while he was really with > >them and he became obsessed with the idea of doing something > >important to redeem himself. Snorky: I'll get to this someday, but I don't think Snape is racked by guilt about his death eater days. > Eloise: > I quoted Rebecca as saying, > >much then saving his life would be construed as really heroic. > > This would also explain why Snape is always running into > >the middle of dangerous situations to try to fix them; he's still > >trying to make up for his past and he still winds up being > >mistrusted and misunderstood for all his efforts. > Eloise: ... > The reason that I wouldn't describe it as a hero complex (although > there is no doubt in my mind that he wants to be one) is that I > think Snape has very specific needs when it comes to recognition. I > think he genuinely wants to be pivotal in bringing down Voldemort, I > think he has an intense rivalry with Harry, both to do with the fight > against Voldemort and as a rival in his relationship with Dumbledore, > I think he needs to prove himself to make up for his past. > > The whole thing is complicated by the fact that he both needs to > make amends for failing to save a man he detested and also has to > protect the son who is a constant reminder of him, his biggest rival > and constantly in his way. I think he has plenty of reason to hate > Harry. Snorky: I explain in a recent message that Snape runs off to save people without thinking very much, and thinks about his deserved reward later. It is at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/119316. I think the roots of Snapes' hero complex are something we'll learn about, and that they have something to do with his upbringing. Perhaps Snape is an orphan like Harry who goes running around saving people for some reason related to being an orphan, like hating to lose anyone to the grim reaper. (Harry's orphan-hero connection was discussed recently.) It's also possible that Snape learns to hate Harry less as he learns about Harry's upbringing, recognizes what a good Slytherin Harry could have been, and comes to appreciate the huge number of things they have in common. Just a heads up in case you think I'm ignoring you: I have so many things to do to prepare for the holidays that I'm dropping out of the HP universe for a while. Happy hunting! From stonehenge.orders at verizon.net Mon Dec 6 03:21:44 2004 From: stonehenge.orders at verizon.net (kjirstem) Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 03:21:44 -0000 Subject: The silver hand (Was: The Darkness Within) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119366 > Geoff wrote: > > Secondly, where does the idea come from that conjured > objects are transient? There is evidence in at least two places - > probably more - that objects are removed by using the spell >"Evanesco". > > Carol responds: > It comes mostly from one of JKR's interviews, where she explained >that she had placed certain limits on magic, and one of them was that > objects conjured out of thin air were transient. Otherwise, Harry >and Hermione could have conjured up a feast for Sirius in GoF instead >of taking him chicken legs from Hogwarts and the Weasleys could >conjure up money to pay their expenses. > > But conjured money melts into thin air, as we've seen with >Leprechaun gold. Which is why I raised the question about Peter's >silver hand possibly suffering a similar fate. (Still wondering what >other people think on that question.) > > Also, isn't it just spilled liquids that can be "vanished" >permanently with Evanesco? Otherwise, Umbridge would probably have >Evanescoed Harry's and the Weasley Twins' brooms rather than >confiscating. > Unfair, yes. Unethical, yes. But what would Umbridge care? kjirstem: This thread is probably gone by, but I thought it was interesting, so here goes. Reading the passage where Voldemort conjures the silver hand, it sounds to me that he may have brought the silver itself from somewhere and perhaps then transfigured it into the hand. The quote is: "Voldemort raised his wand again and whirled it through the air. A streak of what looked like molten silver hung shining in the wand's wake. Momentarily shapeless, it writhed and then formed itself..." (GOF Ch 33) The transient nature of conjured items is puzzling to me, I'm not sure how to tell what stays where it is conjured and what does not. Perhaps as long as an item is in use it doesn't return to its previous location? I think this would keep the silver hand from disappearing off Peter's wrist. Or, perhaps if what is conjured is a substance that actually exists somewhere (and that the person conjuring has a right to take?) it stays where it is brought by the spell. As far as Evanesco goes, that is definitely used on items other than liquid. Bill uses it to remove some scrolls off the kitchen table in OotP, the fifth years use it on mice in Charms class, I think there were other examples too. I wonder where things go when they are Evanescoed - back to where they came from, or where someone directed them to go? If it can be used on mice, why didn't Lily just Evanesco baby Harry? For that matter, why not use it on Voldemort when he's being nasty? I'm sure there are probably good reasons, probably it is hard enough to do correctly on a mouse, never mind a child or an evil overlord, but I can't help wondering. Kjirstem From willsonkmom at msn.com Mon Dec 6 04:00:24 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 04:00:24 -0000 Subject: One question was(Re: Predictions for book 6 and 7.) In-Reply-To: <20041204155636.94628.qmail@web53505.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119367 > > moonmyyst > p.s.... If you could ask JKR just one thing, what would it be? (that she might actually answer!!) > Potioncat: What is the definition of Dark Arts/Dark Magic? From willsonkmom at msn.com Mon Dec 6 04:04:44 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 04:04:44 -0000 Subject: Happy Birthday, Hagrid Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119368 I'm not sure if anyone else cares or wants to know these things, but as I don't play the games on JKR's site, and am only looking for whatever snips of canon I can find, I thought I'd share, 6th of December is Hagrid's birthday. Potioncat (who is really looking out for Snape's birthday, but that's ok) From willsonkmom at msn.com Mon Dec 6 04:32:11 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 04:32:11 -0000 Subject: FBaWTFT (was Re: Snape and the Kappa: a Flint? )(Was: Snape and Lupin's Cha) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119369 > > Alla: > > What Nora said. Fantastic beasts is canon too Potioncat: I wonder at JKR for putting such a funny thing in FBaWTFT. That is, that Snape made a mistake. Was it her way of giving the die-hard fans a nod? For all the times Ron and Harry didn't listen to Snape, it is sort of funny that they caught the mistake he made. I've only seen FBaWTFT and QTTA once, as libary books and I managed to miss all the really cool stuff in both of them. So what if Snape made a mistake? It wasn't his class, he was filling in...he had his own agenda (out Lupin without being overly obvious about it...) And who among us hasn't taken pleasure at catching an unpopular teacher in a mistake? If we're going to accept as canon that Theodore's father is an elderly widow and that Dean Thomas' father was a wizard, we have to accept this. As for the Flint flint...I think JKR was poking fun at herself when she said something along the line if it had to be her mistake or Flint's mistake, she would let it be Flint's and he had to repeat the 7th year. But she pretty much admitted she made a mistake. And she took blame for Mark Evans too. So I accept Kappas as not being from Mongolia. Snape, I'm sure, concentrated on Dark Curses and paid very little attention to Wee Dark Beasties. Potioncat From coriolan at worldnet.att.net Mon Dec 6 05:19:26 2004 From: coriolan at worldnet.att.net (coriolan_cmc) Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 05:19:26 -0000 Subject: FILK: Wrinkled Elf Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119370 Wrinkled Elf To the tune of Jingle Bells THE SCENE: 12 Grimmauld Place, around Christmas. As KREACHER enters, the mounted heads of the House-Elves ? each wearing a Santa cap ? burst into song. CHORUS OF ELF HEADS Skulking through the house Acting like he's deaf Savaging the visitors And saving photographs Loving Mother Black Loathing Sirius KREACHER Oh, what am I up to? Hint: It's deleterious! CHORUS OF ELF HEADS Oh! Wrinkled elf, wrinkled elf Wrinkled, old and gray Fill his house with half-breeds And you'll fill him with dismay Oh! Wrinkled elf, wrinkled elf Wrinkled, old and gray He would rather play the role Of villain than valet. KREACHER Ten years home alone Like the Macaulay lad Then doors are open thrown Padfoot's in my pad Brings into disgrace All his ancestry He now says he will erase Our grand old tapestry CHORUS OF ELF HEADS Oh! Wrinkled elf, wrinkled elf Wrinkled, old and gray Fill his house with half-breeds And you'll fill him with dismay Oh! Wrinkled elf, wrinkled elf Wrinkled, old and gray He would rather play the role Of villain than valet. KREACHER Now the time is right Grimmauld Place I'll leave To the Malfoy site Wicked plots to weave Hippogriff I've harmed Potter's in the hearth Sirius will buy the farm, It's his last day on earth. KREACHER & CHORUS Oh! Wrinkled elf, wrinkled elf Wrinkled, old and gray Fill my/his house with half-breeds And I'll/he'll fill you/them with dismay Oh! Wrinkled elf, wrinkled elf Wrinkled, old and gray I/He would rather play the role Of villain than valet. I/He would rather play the role Of villain than valet! - CMC (OK, OK, so "hearth" and "earth" don't actually rhyme ) HARRY POTTER FILKS http://home.att.net/~coriolan/hpfilks.htm From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Dec 6 05:23:48 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 05:23:48 -0000 Subject: The silver hand (Was: The Darkness Within) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119371 kjirstem wrote: > > > The transient nature of conjured items is puzzling to me, I'm not sure how to tell what stays where it is conjured and what does not. > Perhaps as long as an item is in use it doesn't return to its previous location? I think this would keep the silver hand from disappearing off Peter's wrist. Or, perhaps if what is conjured is a substance that actually exists somewhere (and that the person conjuring has a right to take?) it stays where it is brought by the spell. > > As far as Evanesco goes, that is definitely used on items other than > liquid. Bill uses it to remove some scrolls off the kitchen table in OotP, the fifth years use it on mice in Charms class, I think there > were other examples too. I wonder where things go when they are > Evanescoed - back to where they came from, or where someone directed > them to go? If it can be used on mice, why didn't Lily just Evanesco baby Harry? For that matter, why not use it on Voldemort when he's being nasty? I'm sure there are probably good reasons, probably it is hard enough to do correctly on a mouse, never mind a child or an evil overlord, but I can't help wondering. > > Carol responds: I don't know what to make of the conjured items either, or I wouldn't have asked the question about Peter's silver hand. But clearly some conjured items, like Leprechauns' gold, are temporary, and I'm guessing that the chairs and sleeping bags Dumbledore conjures on various occasions last only as long as they're needed, as you suggest. But Peter's hand will continue to be needed, so would that be sufficient reason for it to last? And as for it being conjured out of a substance he has a right to use, where would the silver have come from? As for Evanseco, which Snape and Hermione use to clean up spilled liquids, it's pretty clear that the liquids are gone forever. It's odd that Bill would use the same spell to hide some scrolls that he surely will want to use again. I don't think *they* permanently vanished into thin air. Maybe the poor mice did, though--in which case, you certainly wouldn't want to use it on a baby! And even if the baby didn't vanish permanently, how would you find him again? "Accio, Harry!" and Baby Harry comes zooming to you like the broom in the First Task from wherever he's been hiding, in about the same condition as Montague when he's found after being stuffed into the vanishing cabinet? And I don't think you'd dare to use it on an evil overlord for fear that he'd show up in, erm, Mongolia. Carol, who still isn't convinced that Peter's silver hand ought to stay in place if it follows the laws of JKR's universe but is pretty sure that she'll ignore those laws if the plot requires him to keep it From coriolan at worldnet.att.net Mon Dec 6 05:28:51 2004 From: coriolan at worldnet.att.net (coriolan_cmc) Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 05:28:51 -0000 Subject: Asking JKR just one question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119372 1) Does the Pensieve provide an objective record of past events, or is it distorted by the individual's subjective rememberance? 2) How do fudge and DD converse with dementors? 3) What is the natural history of dementors (e.g., do they have genders, do they reproduce sexually, are little dementors raised in a family, etc.) 4) Not having even heard of the AK curse in Book Three, could Harry have actually been able to kill Sirius in the Shack, had he made the attempt? - CMC (OK, that's four questions) From gbannister10 at aol.com Mon Dec 6 07:51:39 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 07:51:39 -0000 Subject: Voldermort's "death" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119373 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "whimsyflower" wrote: Wildflower: > Like others, I have had JKR's question about why didn't LV die when > his AK curse rebounded onto him in PS/SS rolling around in my head. The > other day I was listening to PS/SS, and heard, in a new way, Dumbledore's > telling Harry, "not being truly alive, he (LV) cannot be killed." (p. 298, > PS/SS, US edition). So Voldy wasn't "truly alive" from the very beginning. Geoff: I'm not sure that I read that into the narrative. When Harry first sees Tom in the flashback through the diary in COS, he appears to be perfectly normal. When Diary!Riddle and Harry meet in the Chamber, Tom says to Harry that he /is/ Lord Voldemort and, in his "memory" form appears as an echo of a normal living person. Hagrid's view was "Dunno if he had enough human /left/ in him to die." (My emphasis). (PS "The Keeper of the Keys" p.46 UK edition). Hence I feel I cannot agree with him not being truly alive from the very beginning. So, that begs the question, when did he cease to be truly alive? At Godric's Hollow? Or earlier perhaps when he "disappeared after leaving the school... travelled far and wide... sank so deeply into the Dark Arts, consorted with the very worst of our kind, underwent so many dangerous, magical transformations that when he resurfaced as Lord Voldemort, he was barely recognisable." (COS "Dobby's Reward" p.242 UK edition) As a follow-up to that last quote, we know, from Riddle's own testimony, that Dumbeldore suspected that Tom was up to something and kept "an annoyingly close watch on me" (COS "The Heir of Slytherin" p.230 UK edition). But did he, at that time, know that he was calling himself Lord Voldemort? From eloiseherisson at aol.com Mon Dec 6 10:13:56 2004 From: eloiseherisson at aol.com (eloise_herisson) Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 10:13:56 -0000 Subject: Snape's hero complex In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119374 Hoping to catch Snorky before the holidays take over.... Snorky quotes: > > Eloise: > > ...In PS, we have no suggestion that Severus shares his mistrust > > of Quirrell with D as he does later of Lupin. Why? I think that > > he is desperate to be the one who protects the stone, who can > > take it safely to D, thus declaring both his loyalty and his > > claim to favoured child status. This is why he is so keen to keep > > Harry out of the way. And then the dratted child does it again! > > Similarly, he wants it to be he who catches Sirius. > > Snorky: > It's possible, but he still risks his life in PS/SS (the dog biting > incident, taking on Quirrell in the forest), and it seems a bit too > much to risk for proof of loyalty and favoured child status. I don't > see why he would risk so much at this point in his life, when DD > doesn't even really talk much to Harry, and Snape's loyalty doesn't > seem to be doubted by DD. Eloise: As you kindly pointed out I did write that some time ago (although only *one book* ago). I might phrase things a little differently now. I think that the need to prove himself is very strong. Yes, this manifests itself as what you term a hero complex, but working in secret, Dumbledore's approval and recognition was all that he was going to get at that point. Have I mentioned I view Snape as extremely insecure? I think that need for approval is very deep. It's true that the books don't indicate that Dumbledore talks to Harry that much, but I'm sure that Snape is aware of Dumbledore's attachment to him and given his special nature, he's an obvious threat to his status. Snape does seem to be Dumbledore's right hand man and there's a danger of his role being taken over by this upstart boy with what might turn out to be precocious talent. It's in Snape's interests that he *isn't* precociously talented, which could be another factor in his constantly putting him down as we discuss below. By PoA, there's a chance of public recognition, yes, but the Sirius thing is so personal, that there I believe he was driven not only by a desire to protect Harry (desire isn't exactly the right word, duty, perhaps) but by a personal desire for revenge, not simply for what Sirius did to him at school, as if that wasn't enough, but for being instrumental in making him fail to save James. I've argued before that one of the things Snape can't stand (in himself, primarily, then projected onto others around him, particularly students) is failure. Sirius (he thinks) made him fail. > > Eloise: > > 6) In his dealings with Harry, Severus is obsessed with putting > > him in his place, assuming that he will have ideas of grandeur, > > that fame will go to his head. I think he is aware, as the Sorting > > hat was, that Harry could have done well in Slytherin and fears that > > Harry himself might be open to corruption. Even worse, he is a rival > > in his relationship with D. D trusts Severus, but he favours Harry. Snorky: > Are you saying that Snape is doing the above (putting him in his > place, etcetera) to save Harry from corruption? Also, I'm not sure > that DD doesn't love Severus almost as much as a son. (In case you're > curious, I don't like Snape in general.) I don't think it's his prime motivation, but it might well be the way he rationalises it to himself. He does disagree with Dumbledore's policies from time to time, particularly the way he treats Harry. He explicitly says as much to Fudge in PoA, IIRC. I'm not at all sure that he doesn't see himself as a counterbalance to Dumbledore's indulgence and perceived favouritism. And yes, Dumbledore is deeply fond of Severus. I'm sure of that. Severus is the Prodigal Son, wayward, difficult, selfish, flew off to make his fortune elsewhere when he didn't get his dues at home, but when returning penitent, is welcomed back. I think Dumbledore loves him particularly for all his faults. But perhaps that's projection on *my* part. > > Eloise: > > and again in 33668, > > > I think it is acutely painful for him that 'famous Harry Potter' > > > gets all the credit for Voldemort's downfall when however much > > > 'good' he has done is secret. > > > 'Fame isn't everything' isn't just another nasty remark, it's a > > > cri de coeur. > > > Snorky: > Yes, 'Fame isn't everything' is a big clue. I think fame is on Snape's > brain because Harry has it, and he doesn't, yet they are both heros. Exactly. (big snips> Snorky: > It's also possible that Snape learns to hate Harry less as he learns > about Harry's upbringing, recognizes what a good Slytherin Harry could > have been, and comes to appreciate the huge number of things they have > in common. Eloise: I wonder. It could work the other way as well, you know. The more he sees they have in common, the more animosity it might arouse. The more they have in common, the more it could have been *he*, not Harry, who was the hero. Life's just so unfair. Poor Severus. I think he'll come to respect Harry a bit more, but very reluctantly and I'll be surprised if he ever shows it. Snorky: > > Just a heads up in case you think I'm ignoring you: I have so many > things to do to prepare for the holidays that I'm dropping out of the > HP universe for a while. Happy hunting! Thanks. Wanted to get this off before you disappear, if you haven't already. I should drop out too, really, but.... ~Eloise From miamibarb at BellSouth.net Mon Dec 6 12:05:38 2004 From: miamibarb at BellSouth.net (Barb Roberts) Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 07:05:38 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Underage Magic Discrepancy In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <24CDE304-477F-11D9-9E68-000A95DC8A32@bellsouth.net> No: HPFGUIDX 119375 kjubinski wrote: > > I am just a little confused by the consistency of "reprimands" for > underage use of magic...? . > > Are there "levels" of accepted magic?? Why?? While I agree that using > lumos for a bit of light is not nearly as involved (to other people) > as disarming them, immobilizing someone, and so on it is still magic > that includes the use of the wand.? It would violate both underage and > secrecy usage. > This doesn't exactly address your question, but it may explain a few inconsistencies. I've always thought that, in OotP , during Harry's rescue from the Weaselys that the advanced guard were there largely to thwart or take advantage of a hole in the magical monitoring of Harry. Thus the rescue group could use a lot of magic in an all-muggle household without getting into trouble. I suspect that the Weasley's demolition of the Dursley's living room was possible only because of Arthur's ties to the ministry. Wouldn't it be like Arthur to suspend the monitoring for at the same time that he had Dursley's fireplace added to the Floo network? It seems that great unfairness exists between how much magic that different children can get away with. Just as children on farms can learn in drive cars on private fields before the driving age, while children who live in suburbia or the city must wait until they can get a learner's permit. Children from magical families can practice magic largely undetected while muggle-borns are not allowed too. A previous post suggested that the pure-borns wanted to give an unfair advantage to their children. I thought this was a good point. Wasn't Dumbledore against the underage magic regulations? He probably saw that it was inheriently unfair and prejudicial. It is also probable that most magical, muggle-born children can get by with performing a lot more underage magic than carefully watched Harry is able to do. Barbara Roberts, who ought to be getting ready for work [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Mon Dec 6 13:15:55 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 13:15:55 -0000 Subject: Is Snape really THAT good in Potions?(was: Snape and the Kappa) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119376 After Nora found a textbook example that Snape might not be such an expert in DADA as he is cracked up to be, I had a REALLY strange thought: Why do we all assume that Snape is such a wiz in Potions? I've raked my brains, and as far as I can remember the only canon source for that is Lupin, who tells Harry in PoA that the Wolfbane Potion is very complex and very few potion masters are up to it. Can someone corroborate Snape's expertise from a different source? After all, the fact that a teacher calls his students "idiots" doesn't automatically means that he is an expert. And the fact DD hired him is also not much of a proof, considering DD also hired Trelawney and some not-terribly-competent DADA teachers. Ha, I know - he prepared Veritaserum and it did make Crouch Jr confess. The proof is in the pudding! But did Snape really prepare that Veritaserum? Somehow we all assume he did, but I couldn't find it in canon. DD asks him to bring "the strongest Truth Potion you possess" (GoF, Ch. 35). "Possess" and not "prepared". Snape himself only claims to prepare the Veritaserum in OotP, which turned out to be fake. And assuming for a moment he did brew the Veritaserum in GoF, are we told that only the best experts can brew Veritaserum? Snape says that it is controlled by very strict Ministry guidelines, and apparently it takes a lot of time (and work?) to produce a very small amount, but is it written anywhere that it takes a REAL expert? If so, I couldn't find it. Hmm. Would someone talk me out of this? I'll find it strange if Snape's reputation as a genius potion master would depend solely on Lupin's word. And, since we (well, most of us) know how kind and generous Lupin usually is, are we so sure that he wasn't just a bit overgenerous to Snape here? It does look like he was trying to make amends with Snape for most of the PoA year, calling him pleasantly "Severus" and mostly overlooking Snape sneering at him. And just when praising Snape he was also pointedly ignoring Harry trying to suggest that Snape is not to be trusted. And of course, if Lupin is ESE we definitely should not take his word if it cannot be corroborated anywhere in canon. He might have some ulterior motives. And BTW, how do we know that Snape is such a superb Occlumens? Oops, Lupin again. Do I detect a pattern here? Neri From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Mon Dec 6 13:38:03 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 05:38:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape and the Kappa: a Flint? (Was: Snape and Lupin's Character Arcs) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041206133803.60386.qmail@web53101.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119377 > Carol: > So, I'm suggesting, when she discovers that she was wrong about > Kappas being found in Mongolia, she covers her own error by > attributing it to Snape. > I think it's more likely that Snape - with his, shall we say, unique - personal experience of the Dark Arts would say that knowing the habitat of an obscure Asian water sprite (or whatever it was) that the average student might only run across on an extended foreign trip is by no means the only standard of a teacher's competence in DADA and that he is qualified to talk about the kind of Dark Arts that students and their families are unfortunately more likely to encounter in the current WW situation. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - now with 250MB free storage. Learn more. http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250 From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Mon Dec 6 13:40:15 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 05:40:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Underage Magic Discrepancy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041206134015.97167.qmail@web53106.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119378 --- Geoff Bannister wrote: > I sometimes wonder whether Privet Drive is more closely monitored > than other places because Harry is there, not to catch him out but > originally for his security. I've always assumed this. I doubt that the MoM regards other kids as requiring observation - because most kids have parents/guardians to keep an eye on that kind of thing (we'll assume inadvertant or inexperienced magic can be dangerous, like letting a kid play with matches), they live in separate communities away from muggles, etc. As far as the MoM is concerned, Harry's a special case. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - now with 250MB free storage. Learn more. http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250 From anita_hillin at yahoo.com Mon Dec 6 11:49:56 2004 From: anita_hillin at yahoo.com (AnitaKH) Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 03:49:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 33 - Fight and Flight Message-ID: <20041206114956.96593.qmail@web42107.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119379 With many thanks to PenapartElf, the following is respectfully submitted: Chapter 33 ? Fight and Flight As the chapter opens, Hermione and Harry are leading Professor Umbridge to the ?weapon? Hermione has ?confessed? that the DA has developed. Umbridge eagerly follows Hermione and Harry until they reach the Dark Forest where she hesitates, but being assured the weapon is hidden there, she overcomes her reluctance to enter and agrees to continue. As they crash through the underbrush heading toward Aragog?s lair, much to Harry?s alarm, he learns that Hermione is deliberately trying to get the attention of the forest creatures. Sure enough, they are eventually greeted by an arrow and the sound of pounding hooves. Fifty centaurs surround them, led by Magorian, the chestnut. He interrogates a terrified Umbridge, who invokes her authority as a representative of the Ministry of Magic, citing their status as near-human creatures. This enrages the centaurs, who consider themselves superior beings, and one shoots an arrow that narrowly misses Umbridge?s head. She responds by binding Magorian with an Incarcerous charm, which incites the centaurs to charge. Harry pulls Hermione to the ground for cover, and they see Bane carry off a screaming Umbridge. As he reaches for Umbridge?s dropped wand, Harry is accosted by the grey centaur. When he asks what brought them there, Hermione tells them they came into the forest, hoping the centaurs would drive off Umbridge for them. From the looks on their faces, Harry can tell immediately this was a big mistake. Hermione?s efforts to explain herself only make matters worse, and the crowd of centaurs has turned against them. Just as the crowd rage is building, they hear crashing from the forest, and Grawp appears. The centaurs range themselves defensively as he lumbers into the clearing. Shouting ?Hagger,? Grawp appears to be searching for something. Hermione eventually realizes he?s asking for Hagrid. He spots Harry and Hermione and remembers a version of Hermione?s name. He asks her where Hagrid is, she says she doesn?t know, and he reaches for her, knocking over a centaur in the process. This is enough provocation for the centaurs, who open fire on Grawp. While he rampages from pain and anger, Harry and Hermione race into the forest, escaping from the centaurs. As the threat of the centaurs fades, Harry is reminded by his throbbing scar that they are even further from their goal of rescuing Sirius. He vents his frustration at Hermione, who counters by asking Harry how he planned to get to London. Her question is repeated by Ron, who with Luna, Ginny and Neville has escaped the Inquisitorial Squad. Following a recap of their various adventures, they return to the problem of getting to London. Luna matter-of-factly tells the group they?re going to fly. The group argues about who should go, Ron and Harry preferring to leave Ginny, Neville and Luna behind, while the three are determined to accompany them. Harry argues that they don?t have enough brooms between them to fly to London anyway, when Luna points out that Thestrals have wandered into the area, apparently drawn by Grawp?s blood which has spattered Harry?s and Hermione?s robes. Eventually, six or seven Thestrals appear, and Harry reluctantly agrees to let all five accompany him to London. Discussion Questions 1. Harry ?had the feeling he had had before in the forest, one of being watched by unseen eyes.?(p. 664, Bloomsbury edition) We may presume this refers in part to the centaurs and forest creatures; are there other eyes watching him? 2. Umbridge?s months of arrogance and abuse of power finally meet their match with the Centaurs. How satisfied are we with this outcome? 3. Hermione?s remarks to the centaurs nearly spell doom for her and Harry. What does this say about her understanding of them? 4. Grawp appears to remember Hermione, and he reaches for her. How dangerous is he at this point? 5. Harry and Ron try to discourage Ginny, Luna and Neville from joining them to help Sirius in London. Harry thinks, ?...if he could have chosen any member of the DA? to join him in the attempt to rescue Sirius, he would not have picked Ginny, Neville or Luna.? (p. 671) Why are they so opposed to these specific people? 6. In the forest, Harry appears to vent his fury at Hermione as an outlet for his fear and anger at himself. Is this a pattern? 7. Umbridge says to Harry: "The Ministry places a rather higher value on my life than yours, I'm afraid." (P. 663) Is this true in fact or just in Umbridge's own mind? How do her dealings with the centaurs reflect upon Umbridge's self-supposed importance? 8. When Harry says, "Look, you three ?? he pointed at Neville, Ginny, and Luna, ?you're not involved in this, you're not --" (p. 672) which molly-coddling member of the Order does Harry seem to be channeling? As always, additional questions/thoughts are very welcome. akh, who is mystified why discussion point 7 won't format correctly NOTE: For more information on HPfGU's chapter discussions, please see http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/67817 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/85829 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/116919 "OotP Chapter Discussions" at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/database * * * --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 250MB free storage. Do more. Manage less. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From annemehr at yahoo.com Mon Dec 6 15:47:51 2004 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 15:47:51 -0000 Subject: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 33 - Fight and Flight In-Reply-To: <20041206114956.96593.qmail@web42107.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119380 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, AnitaKH wrote: > Discussion Questions > > 1. Harry "had the feeling he had had before in the forest, one of being watched by unseen eyes."(p. 664, Bloomsbury edition) We may presume this refers in part to the centaurs and forest creatures; are there other eyes watching him? Annemehr: There are hints that there is much more living in there than we know. "Werewolves" were mentioned more than once (living as outcasts like an old-time leper colony? Is Lupin more fortunate than we know? Judging by what Arthur said to the new-bitten werewolf in St Mungo's, perhaps this rumor is obsolete). Also, we keep finding out about new inhabitants: first it was werewolves, unicorns and centaurs, then acromantula, then bowtruckles and thestrals... what am I missing (not counting Grawp as Hagrid *put* him there)? I wouldn't be surprised if, in the event of a "Battle of Hogwarts," a whole crowd of different creatures swarmed out of there. > > > 2. Umbridge's months of arrogance and abuse of power finally meet their match with the Centaurs. How satisfied are we with this outcome? Annemehr: Not at all, of course! :) No, I want Molly to find out about the quill and the Dementors and then the two of them to get locked in a room together. :D > > > 3. Hermione's remarks to the centaurs nearly spell doom for her and Harry. What does this say about her understanding of them? Annemehr: Has she ever actually had a chance to understand them? She had to come up with the plan itself during the time Umbridge was deciding which part of Harry to aim the Cruciatus at, so it couldn't be well-thought-out to begin with. Then, she'd only met Centaurs once, that time with Hagrid, and as they were obviously angry with Hagrid over rescuing Firenze, I'm not sure she realised just how haughty they were in general. After all, what she said oughtn't to get anyone killed by a human unless they said it to the *very worst* of them. Lucius Malfoy wouldn't have killed her for that. Maybe Jesse James would. Not to mention, she thought she was a "foal!" > > 5. Harry and Ron try to discourage Ginny, Luna and Neville from joining them to help Sirius in London. Harry thinks, "...if he could have chosen any member of the DA to join him in the attempt to rescue Sirius, he would not have picked Ginny, Neville or Luna." (p. 671) Why are they so opposed to these specific people? Annemehr: I actually think he'd rather not have taken *anyone* but Ron and Hermione. But anyway, I think Ginny is "as good as" his little sister, Luna still seems spacey to him, and I don't think he'd truly switched gears in his thinking about Neville yet, who always has so much trouble in class, though he'd improved so much in the DA. > > > 6. In the forest, Harry appears to vent his fury at Hermione as an outlet for his fear and anger at himself. Is this a pattern? Annemehr: Well, poor kid, I think she's one of his only "safe places" *to* vent. I think it's only a temporary pattern. She can take it. ;) > > 7. Umbridge says to Harry: "The Ministry places a rather higher value on my life than yours, > > I'm afraid." (P. 663) Is this true in fact or just in Umbridge's own mind? How do her dealings > > with the centaurs reflect upon Umbridge's self-supposed importance? Annemehr: I think it is true within Umbridge's (and Fudge's) coterie. Fudge's "party" is in power at the moment, but they arent' the whole ministry. Remember in GoF that Arthur Weasley is shown to have a good deal of respect from certain quarters of the MoM: Diggory, Bagman, Crouch, others in the circle around the Dark Mark in the forest, and whoever Dumbledore wants him to tell about LV being back -- and then in OoP we learn about Tonks and Shacklebolt. > > > 8. When Harry says, "Look, you three ?" he pointed at Neville, Ginny, and Luna, "you're not involved in this, you're not --" (p. 672) which molly-coddling member of the Order does Harry seem to be channeling? Annemehr: Yes, but I love Molly. Beyond that, see answer to #5. Thanks for doing the chapter. :) From annemehr at yahoo.com Mon Dec 6 16:01:13 2004 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 16:01:13 -0000 Subject: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 33 - Fight and Flight [slight correction] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119381 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "annemehr" wrote: Then, she'd only met Centaurs once, > that time with Hagrid, and as they were obviously angry with Hagrid > over rescuing Firenze, I'm not sure she realised just how haughty they > were in general. I'd forgotten she was there for that bit in CoS for the "Mars is bright tonight" conversation with Bane. She didn't hear Bane's disapproval of Firenze's rescue of Harry though, and as there was nothing to indicate they would have killed her and Harry in OoP, I think my point still holds. Annemehr From elsyee_h at yahoo.com Mon Dec 6 16:19:17 2004 From: elsyee_h at yahoo.com (Tammy) Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 16:19:17 -0000 Subject: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 33 - Fight and Flight In-Reply-To: <20041206114956.96593.qmail@web42107.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119382 AnitaKH wrote: > > Discussion Questions > > > > 1. Harry "had the feeling he had had before in the forest, one of being watched by unseen eyes."(p. 664, Bloomsbury edition) We may presume this refers in part to the centaurs and forest creatures; are there other eyes watching him? > Tammy replies: Actually I think there is something else in the forest, perhaps something that we don't know about yet. Perhaps the car is still there keeping an eye on them. Something has to be watching out for Harry, what with all the times Harry goes into that forest and manages to come out unharmed. > > > 2. Umbridge's months of arrogance and abuse of power finally meet their match with the Centaurs. How satisfied are we with this outcome? > Tammy replies: I think I'm not the only one who finds this a huge example of JKR's odd sense of humor, and poetic justice. DU, who thinks herself above all "half-breeds" getting beaten down by half-breeds... I might like those centaurs yet! > > > 3. Hermione's remarks to the centaurs nearly spell doom for her and Harry. What does this say about her understanding of them? > > Tammy replies: Hermione has great book knowledge, but her knowledge of how to interact with and understand the world is stunted. It's a great characterization on JKR's part. In the real world, most intelligent people have a hard time interacting with "normal" people, particularly those who were as intelligent as Hermione at such a young age. I'm sure Harry and Ron will help her out though. > > > 5. Harry and Ron try to discourage Ginny, Luna and Neville from joining them to help Sirius in London. Harry thinks, "...if he could have chosen any member of the DA to join him in the attempt to rescue Sirius, he would not have picked Ginny, Neville or Luna." (p. 671) Why are they so opposed to these specific people? > Tammy replies: I think he feels they will just be in the way. Harry's arrogant, and he feels that he's the only one who can do these things. He's seemed to resign himself to Ron and Hermione coming along, perhaps even accepting that they are useful, but to Harry, he's the only person in the world who could possibly understand the danger, the urgency and no one else could possibly save Sirius. > > > 6. In the forest, Harry appears to vent his fury at Hermione as an outlet for his fear and anger at himself. Is this a pattern? Tammy replies: Someone here (and I forget who, so I apologize in advance) has posted long ranting (very good ones I might add) about how horrid Harry's behaviour in general is towards his friends. I agree with that person that Harry needs a serious attitude adjustment. It's definitely a pattern, and one that Harry needs to break soon, or someone else (oh I hope it's Snape) will break it for him. -Tammy who is amazed she's actually in time to participate in a Chapter Discussion :P From tzakis1225 at netzero.com Mon Dec 6 17:11:48 2004 From: tzakis1225 at netzero.com (demetra1225) Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 17:11:48 -0000 Subject: Snape and Lupin's Character Arcs (was: Lupin's Char Arc) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119383 n HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" > wrote: > That is your opinion, Alla. Mine is that Harry's problems with > Snape started when Harry started thinking that evil is a Slytherin > trait instead of a human one. If you want to blame somebody for > that, you could blame Hagrid. McGonagall wouldn't be any nicer > to a student she caught talking back or making faces at her. > Lupinlore responded: > Oh, I most certainly and emphatically disagree with that one. > McGonagall would certainly correct such a student, granted, but not > in the unprofessional and demeaning way used by Snape. [snip] Now Demetra: Are you sure McGonnagall wouldn't? I don't have my copy of GoF with me so I can't quote directly, but do you recall McGonnagall speaking to the Gryffindors prior to the arrival of the students from the other schools for the Triwizard Tournament. She (IMHO) embarrasses Neville in front of the whole class by saying something along the lines of not wanting the students from the other schools to see that Neville couldn't even perform a simple switching spell. I think it's pretty demeaning, not to mention completely unnecessary to berate Neville in this way. And don't get me started on how much more this incident irked me after reading her comment in OotP that all Neville lacks is self- confidence. Is this her idea of a confidence booster? Demetra From chrissilein at yahoo.com Mon Dec 6 17:30:24 2004 From: chrissilein at yahoo.com (LadyOfThePensieve) Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 17:30:24 -0000 Subject: Is Snape really THAT good in Potions?(was: Snape and the Kappa) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119384 Hello, I honestly think he is simply the BEST in Potions. And Dumbledore knows it! Remember he brewed the potion of the mandrakes which helped the petrified persons to come back into "life". With his potion the evil curse of the Basilisk became powerless. I could mention much more examples. He isn?t just a teacher in potions (a schoolmaster), no he is indeed a Master of the skill itself. Greetings. -- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nkafkafi" wrote: > > After Nora found a textbook example that Snape might not be such an > expert in DADA as he is cracked up to be, I had a REALLY strange > thought: Why do we all assume that Snape is such a wiz in Potions? > I've raked my brains, and as far as I can remember the only canon > source for that is Lupin, who tells Harry in PoA that the Wolfbane > Potion is very complex and very few potion masters are up to it. Can > someone corroborate Snape's expertise from a different source? > > After all, the fact that a teacher calls his students "idiots" doesn't > automatically means that he is an expert. And the fact DD hired him is > also not much of a proof, considering DD also hired Trelawney and some > not-terribly-competent DADA teachers. > > Ha, I know - he prepared Veritaserum and it did make Crouch Jr > confess. The proof is in the pudding! But did Snape really prepare > that Veritaserum? Somehow we all assume he did, but I couldn't find it > in canon. DD asks him to bring "the strongest Truth Potion you > possess" (GoF, Ch. 35). "Possess" and not "prepared". Snape himself > only claims to prepare the Veritaserum in OotP, which turned out to be > fake. > > And assuming for a moment he did brew the Veritaserum in GoF, are we > told that only the best experts can brew Veritaserum? Snape says that > it is controlled by very strict Ministry guidelines, and apparently it > takes a lot of time (and work?) to produce a very small amount, but is > it written anywhere that it takes a REAL expert? If so, I couldn't > find it. > > Hmm. Would someone talk me out of this? > > I'll find it strange if Snape's reputation as a genius potion master > would depend solely on Lupin's word. And, since we (well, most of us) > know how kind and generous Lupin usually is, are we so sure that he > wasn't just a bit overgenerous to Snape here? It does look like he was > trying to make amends with Snape for most of the PoA year, calling him > pleasantly "Severus" and mostly overlooking Snape sneering at him. And > just when praising Snape he was also pointedly ignoring Harry trying > to suggest that Snape is not to be trusted. > > And of course, if Lupin is ESE we definitely should not take his word > if it cannot be corroborated anywhere in canon. He might have some > ulterior motives. > > And BTW, how do we know that Snape is such a superb Occlumens? Oops, > Lupin again. Do I detect a pattern here? > > Neri From foxmoth at qnet.com Mon Dec 6 17:58:38 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 17:58:38 -0000 Subject: Snape and Lupin's Character Arcs (was: Lupin's Char Arc) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119385 Alla: > Oh, I most certainly and emphatically disagree with that one. McGonagall would certainly correct such a student, granted, but not in the unprofessional and demeaning way used by Snape.< Pippin: Oh, I think you are idealizing McGonagall a bit. JKR called her a scary teacher. Here's an example: "HARRY POTTER!" His heart sank fast than he'd just dived. Professor McGonagall was running towards them. He got to his feet, trembling. "*Never* --in all my time at Hogwarts--" Professor McGonagall was almost speechless with shock, and her glasses flashed furiously, "--how *dare* you--might have broken your neck--"-- PS/SS ch9 Do you think McGonagall was faking her anger? In any case, was it professional for her to scold Harry in front of the Slytherins. Wasn't he horribly humiliated thinking he was going to be punished, and was it fair to let him off only because the Gryffindor team needed a Seeker? Alla: >Also, Harry did not ask to be singled out by Snape in class and ridiculed for not knowing something he could not possibly have known. < Pippin: If Harry couldn't possibly have known it, how come Hermione did? Harry's humiliation came from thinking that other people did know it, Hermione and Draco in particular. It shouldn't be ego-bruising to think that some people in the class know more than you do...why get upset about it? Unless you have a swollen head, of course . I don't recall that Snape has ever said anything about Harry's father in relation to a potions class -- the subject only comes up in relation to rule-breaking. Harry's father was known for that, and Snape had a duty to point out that he shouldn't be admired for it. Pippin previously: > > It is also my opinion that Snape is teaching properly, as properly is defined in the wizarding world, and therefore he has no evil intent. << Lupinlore: > Err, what's your point? Ignorance of the law is no excuse.< Pippin: ::blinks:: ignorance of what law? Snape's conduct is not illegal, or Hermione would have said so. She's quick enough to tell Harry to complain when Umbridge crosses the line. Or do you have canon to the contrary? If you are speaking of moral perfection, all the characters fall short of it, and the question of whether Snape in particular needs redemption is meaningless. Pippin From kirsty_lowson at yahoo.com Mon Dec 6 16:59:44 2004 From: kirsty_lowson at yahoo.com (Kirsty Lowson) Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 16:59:44 +0000 (GMT) Subject: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 33 - Fight and Flight In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041206165944.45094.qmail@web53702.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119386 AKH asks the questions, here are my responses to some of them...plus an intro to me at the end. >>2. Umbridges months of arrogance and abuse of power finally meet their match with the Centaurs. How satisfied are we with this outcome?<< Kirsty: I think she got what was coming to her, but that no student could have done it; she needed to be brought down by beings greater than her, but whom she saw as inferiors. It's not fully satisfying, because I would prefer the punishment to fit the crime, but the fact that justice is meted out by those she despises goes a long way to that! I'd like to see proper justice for use of the blood quill - surely such items are illegal in the wizarding world?? >>3. Hermiones remarks to the centaurs nearly spell doom for her and Harry. What does this say about her understanding of them?<< Kirsty: It's been said, but honestly, there's only so much you can learn in books. Hermione seems to have very few people-skills, and this is increased fivefold when it comes to the behaviour needed not to irk the centaurs. I'm surprised they've not been covered in their Care of Magical Creatures class, though (obviously only theoretically; can't see a centaur submitting to being examined by curious young foals!!) >>4. Grawp appears to remember Hermione, and he reaches for her. How dangerous is he at this point?<< I dunno, is he trying to lift her out of harm's way? He doesn't seem to be intending to eat her... >>5. Harry and Ron try to discourage Ginny, Luna and Neville from joining them to help Sirius in London. Harry thinks, ...if he could have chosen any member of the DA to join him in the attempt to rescue Sirius, he would not have picked Ginny, Neville or Luna. (p. 671) Why are they so opposed to these specific people?<< Kristy: Harry seems to still see Neville as a bumbling idiot - maybe with reason. Within the limits of the Room of Requirement, Neville's fine, but put him in front of Snape and he falls to pieces, despite his new-found confidence in duelling etc. Luna's always presented to us as being completely off the planet, but we see things from Harry's PoV in the books - she's not in Ravenclaw for nothing!! And Ginny - well, there's the little-sister element, which (as a firm H/G shipper) I think is becoming something more here...after all, Harry must know Ginny can hold her own in battle -- the bat-bogey hex being one "off-screen" example. Even Fred and George are impressed at that, and they're usually the first to be disdainful about any prowess. >>6. In the forest, Harry appears to vent his fury at Hermione as an outlet for his fear and anger at himself. Is this a pattern?<< Kirsty: Oh, it's a pattern all right - we see the discussions all over HP-fandom! Harry needs to do some serious growing up, or he will end up pushing Ron and Hermione completely away. He seriously needs to get back on track with Occlumency, or meditation, or something to channel that teenage angst out of him, particularly in the aftermath of Sirius' death. And now about me. My name is Kirsty, I'm a 20 year old law student (finalist) at Queen Mary, University of London (that's in the East End of London). I only came to Harry Potter this last summer. I was pointedly avoiding the books because of all the hype. I'd seen the films, and it was only when I went to Leicester Sq on the opening day of the PoA movie that I thought, 'I really need to read the books!' So off I went to Amazon...four weeks later, all five books have been read (and re-read)...and I realised why there was the hype -- because they really are that good! (Although in my opinion JKR could do with some ruthless editing, I haven't read HBP or Bk7 any more than the rest of you (shame that...) and I don't know how much the back story or sub-plots will be important to the way things work out). I am also musical -- I play the trumpet and sing soprano -- which reminds me that I need to go, as I've got a dress rehearsal across campus -- whoops! Kirsty ===== "If men are always wrong, what does that mean when he tells a woman she looks beautiful?" From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Mon Dec 6 18:18:59 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 18:18:59 -0000 Subject: Racism in the WW and MW In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119387 ericoppen wrote: > One thing to keep in mind is that our modern notion that "racism" > (however defined) is unBigBrotherwise unIngsocful > doubledoubleplusungood (to borrow some Newspeak from _1984_) is very, > very recent. When my parents were young, the "N word" was standard > speech in a lot of the US, and just before I was born, there was > still deep enough suspicion of Catholics that JF Kennedy had to > specifically promise not to be under the Pope's domination to win the > US Presidency. Kim here: I disagree with most of what you wrote. However, first off, maybe you ought to translate into regular English what "unBigBrotherwise unIngsocful doubledoubleplusungood" means. Just to make your point a bit more clear to everyone. As to past standard use of the "N word" and suspicion of Catholics in politics and other aspects of social life (as well as prejudice against other groups), then as now, those were both signs of insensitivity, narrowmindedness, irrational fears, etc. on the part of members of the group that held the reigns of political power in this country. No more, no less, IMO. I think the same holds true of the WW, and my sense is that real world racism is part of what inspires JKR when she writes about similar attitudes and behaviors in the WW. Where do you think she got the idea for the slur "mudblood" in the first place? ericoppen continued: > The WW changes socially to match the MW, but much more slowly. > Hence, it's not surprising that old suspicions of Muggle-born magic > folk, as well as dodgier creatures like giants, is still very much > the norm. Attitudes like the Malfoys', or their analogues, would > have been perfectly normal in Britain up till relatively very > recently. > > Also---I do think that it needs pointing out that wizards' feelings > toward Muggles are not quite analogous to racism. Like it or not, by > their standards Muggles are, at best, crippled. Kim: Well, yes, IMO wizards' feelings towards Muggles are quite analogous to racism in the RW. In fact those feelings in wizards *are* racism, in the broadest sense of the word -- I mean insofar as preconceived, negative, and often incorrect notions that one group holds about another are "racist". And that's pretty much what most racists think of so-called "inferior" groups, that they are by their very nature "crippled" in some sense. Remember too that there are wizards and witches that don't hold such negative attitudes towards Muggles -- I mean, how do you account for the enlightened attitudes of the pureblood Weasleys? What I see is that some people (including wizards) choose to believe that different means inferior, whereas other people (and wizards) realize that different just means different. Of course, conflicts may still result from differences between groups, but those conflicts don't have to lead to racism. Kim From norek_archives2 at hotmail.com Mon Dec 6 18:26:29 2004 From: norek_archives2 at hotmail.com (Janet Anderson) Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 18:26:29 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 33 - Fight and Flight In-Reply-To: <20041206114956.96593.qmail@web42107.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119388 >1. Harry had the feeling he had had before in the forest, one of being >watched by unseen eyes.(p. 664, Bloomsbury edition) We may presume this >refers in part to the centaurs and forest creatures; are there other eyes >watching him? Heaven knows what lives in that forest. As someone pointed out, there are rumors of werewolves, and we know there are giant spiders and at least one feral car. The possibilities are endless. >2. Umbridges months of arrogance and abuse of power finally meet their >match with the Centaurs. How satisfied are we with this outcome? It's satisfying on one level, but the spectacular departure of Fred and George (and Umbridge's departure while being chased by Peeves) were more so, because they were a direct result of her conduct at Hogwarts -- whereas the centaurs are not responding to any actual mistreatment but are ready to be hostile to any human they encounter (see 3 below). >3. Hermiones remarks to the centaurs nearly spell doom for her and Harry. >What does this say about her understanding of them? Not very much, really. It says that Hermione is tactless and doesn't always pick up on other people's feelings, but we knew that. I think the problem here is that no matter how tactful Hermione or anyone else was, the centaurs they encountered were hostile, ready to take offense, and wanted to take out their resentment on someone. From the centaurs' point of view, there was no difference between Umbridge and Hermione; they were both human and that was all that mattered -- proof that racism is not restricted to wizards and humans. :( Someone with more experience or tact might have realized this and approached it differently, but I don't think Hermione is to blame for the centaurs' attitude. >4. Grawp appears to remember Hermione, and he reaches for her. How >dangerous is he at this point? Grawp at this point probably doesn't *intend* to be dangerous. However, even Hagrid has been known to underestimate his own strength sometimes ... >5. Harry and Ron try to discourage Ginny, Luna and Neville from joining >them to help Sirius in London. Harry thinks, ...if he could have chosen >any member of the DA to join him in the attempt to rescue Sirius, he would >not have picked Ginny, Neville or Luna. (p. 671) Why are they so opposed >to these specific people? He probably feels protective toward Ginny, just as Ron does. As for the other two, he knows nothing about Luna and therefore has no reason to have confidence in her or her abilities, and he knows quite a lot about Neville -- and most of it relates to him being not very good at spells or under pressure. >6. In the forest, Harry appears to vent his fury at Hermione as an outlet >for his fear and anger at himself. Is this a pattern? The venting? Yes. Hermione as the target? No. He's also done this to Ron, Ginny, and Dumbledore. People have said that he doesn't treat his friends very well, but I think he vents at them *because* he feels safe with them. >7. Umbridge says to Harry: "The Ministry places a rather higher value on my >life than yours, > >I'm afraid." (P. 663) Is this true in fact or just in Umbridge's own mind? > How do her dealings > > with the centaurs reflect upon Umbridge's self-supposed importance? She probably believes it. And for those parts of the Ministry which she deals with, i.e. Fudge et al., it's quite true -- if Harry got stomped to death by centaurs, they'd breathe a sigh of relief, because he's an inconvenience and an embarrassment to them. (This doesn't even factor in the opinion of any Death Eaters spying in the Ministry.) > 8. When Harry says, "Look, you three he pointed at Neville, Ginny, and >Luna, you're not involved in this, you're not --" (p. 672) which >molly-coddling member of the Order does Harry seem to be channeling? As I said earlier, I think Harry may feel protective toward Ginny, but I think his disinclination to have the other two with him stems from a lack of confidence in their abilities. Janet Anderson From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Dec 6 18:35:10 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 18:35:10 -0000 Subject: Is Snape really THAT good in Potions?(was: Snape and the Kappa) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119389 Neri wrote: > > After Nora found a textbook example that Snape might not be such an > expert in DADA as he is cracked up to be, I had a REALLY strange > thought: Why do we all assume that Snape is such a wiz in Potions? > I've raked my brains, and as far as I can remember the only canon > source for that is Lupin, who tells Harry in PoA that the Wolfbane > Potion is very complex and very few potion masters are up to it. Can > someone corroborate Snape's expertise from a different source? > > Ha, I know - he prepared Veritaserum and it did make Crouch Jr > confess. The proof is in the pudding! But did Snape really prepare > that Veritaserum? Somehow we all assume he did, but I couldn't find it in canon. DD asks him to bring "the strongest Truth Potion you > possess" (GoF, Ch. 35). "Possess" and not "prepared". Snape himself > only claims to prepare the Veritaserum in OotP, which turned out to be fake. > > > I'll find it strange if Snape's reputation as a genius potion master > would depend solely on Lupin's word. And, since we (well, most of us) know how kind and generous Lupin usually is, are we so sure that he wasn't just a bit overgenerous to Snape here? It does look like he was trying to make amends with Snape for most of the PoA year, calling him pleasantly "Severus" and mostly overlooking Snape sneering at him. And just when praising Snape he was also pointedly ignoring Harry trying to suggest that Snape is not to be trusted. > Carol responds: Almost certainly Dumbledore hired Snape to teach potions because he's a Potions Master, and we do see evidence of his skill and knowledge in most of his lessons. He can place the ingredients of a potion on the board with a flick of his wand, evidence that he has memorized not only the ingredients and their proportions but every step in the process. He knows when Neville's potion is the wrong color exactly which step has gone wrong. There is no reason to doubt that he makes all his potions and antidotes himself. Certainly we know that he brews the wolfbane potion, and there is no reason to doubt Lupin's word that it is difficult to prepare and that the ability to do so is rare. Otherwise he, a gifted wizard himself, would brew his own potions. nor can we doubt Lupin's statement that Snape is a superb Occlumens. He clearly knows exactly what Occlumency is and how to do it, as well as what Harry needs to do. The only difficulty is getting an angry Harry who hates Snape to clear his mind, especially since Snape has apparently been forbidden by Dumbledore to explain exactly *why* he should stop himself from having that dream. Occlumency, too, appears to be a rare gift, and Lupin, unlike Sirius, appreciates that. I won't get too deeply into Lupin's motives since they're a side issue here, but I think he resents his adolescent conduct toward Snape, mainly not fulfilling his duties as prefect but also unwittingly endangering him in the Prank. But whatever his motives in praising Snape's abilities to Harry, I see no reason to think that he's not sincere. (But then I don't believe that Lupin, for all his faults, is ESE!, and I think that [in OoP] he understands, as Snape perhaps doesn't yet, that they are both loyal Order members and have to work together. And even in PoA, where he has his own concerns and secrets, he sees no reason not to acknowledge Snape's abilities. I think it's *very* important that he unquestioningly drinks what Harry thinks is poison in front of Harry, and that the wolfbane potion does indeed have its intended effect, though Harry doesn't know that yet.) As for Lupin being the only person to praise Snape's abilities to Harry, he is certainly the best person to do so. Sirius won't even acknowledge that Snape *has* any abilities other than casting hexes or curses; Dumbledore is primarily concerned with getting Harry to treat Snape respectfully and understand that he is to be trusted. McGonagall, who treats Snape as a colleague and an equal even though she's headmistress and he's half her age, has never questioned his abilities. And as someone else pointed out, even Umbridge notes that Snape's students are ahead of where they ought to be according to the Ministry's approved curriculum. And Harry has learned Potions in spite of himself. I still think that Snape's reference to a bezoar on Harry's first day of class will prove to be important. It was his reference in class to polyjuice potions that led Hermione to check out the book he had mentioned which contained the recipe and when the ingredients were stolen from his office, he knew immediately which potion they were intended for. There are probably additional examples, but I can't think of them at the moment. Anyone? Carol From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Mon Dec 6 18:36:38 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 18:36:38 -0000 Subject: werewolf vs animagus In-Reply-To: <20041204211754.19268.qmail@web53109.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119390 > > > Neri earlier: > > > PoA, Ch. 18: > > > "They couldn't keep me company as humans, so > > > they kept me company as animals," said Lupin. > > > "A werewolf is only a danger to people." > > > > > > Juli replied: > > > Thanks for the quote Neri, but my conclusion with > > > that statement is that a werewolf doesn't attack > > > animals, but he did bit Padfoot, so because Sirius > > > was in his animagus form he didn't transform? > > > > Neri replied: > > Your conclusion is one possible interpretation of > > Lupin's statement, but another possible interpretation > > is that even if a werewolf bites an animal, this animal > > doesn't become a werewolf. This sounds to me more probable. > > > > I mean, have you ever heard about a dog werewolf or > > a rat werewolf? > > > Juli again: I guess you're right, although it would be > extermely funny to see a werewolf rat. Say Scrabbers > (before we knew he was Pete), then BANG on a full moon > night he turns into a full grown werewolf. Kim chimes in: Scabbers would turn into a "rat-wolf" wouldn't he? Since werewolf means "man-wolf"? Shades of Bunnicula... (if anyone else is familiar with that children's book). Then again, if a werewolf bit a rat, how much rat would be left to even turn into a rat-wolf...? ;-) Kim From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Mon Dec 6 18:48:49 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 18:48:49 -0000 Subject: Hogwarts letters Re: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: <000601c4da53$08faa040$704b6d51@f3b7j4> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119391 Ffred wrote: Far more interesting thing to wonder about is how the MoM raises its revenues - the WW economy seems far too determinedly anarchic to be as closely ruled as the Muggle one! Kim responds: I wonder if they know how to spin straw into gold...? Or something along the lines of the sorcerer's stone... the elixir of money? After all, the WW is the same physical world as the Muggle world (more or less), it's just that it can't be *seen* by Muggles. So where are they coming up with the raw materials? I've often wondered too where Harry's parents got all their loot (though I'm sure this topic has probably been discussed many times before). Kim From lea_petra at myway.com Mon Dec 6 18:40:53 2004 From: lea_petra at myway.com (mari) Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 13:40:53 -0500 (EST) Subject: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 33 - Fight and Flight Message-ID: <20041206184053.22F0412E12@mprdmxin.myway.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119392 This is my first post on the group. I have enjoyed all the discussions so far. 1. Harry had the feeling he had had before in the forest, one of being watched by unseen eyes.(p. 664, Bloomsbury edition) We may presume this refers in part to the centaurs and forest creatures; are there other eyes watching him? I don't think Hagrid even knows all the creatures that roam those woods. I've often thought of the Forbidden Forest as a type of protective woodland. A last refuge for many magicial creatures. I think more creatures will be introduced in the last two books. Grawp maybe upseting the small balance of the ecosystem there. Look what he was doing to the trees. So prehaps thats why the Centaurs didn't like him being there. As for the Werewolves, maybe it is a place that werewolves could go and saftly transform. But then why have that so close to a school is a little unnerving. 2. Umbridges months of arrogance and abuse of power finally meet their match with the Centaurs. How satisfied are we with this outcome? Enjoyed it. 4. Grawp appears to remember Hermione, and he reaches for her. How dangerous is he at this point? Grawp reminded me of two different characters inthe book. One was King Kong, which Hermonie was Fay Wray. And that Warner Brothers cartoon of the Abombinal (sorry spelling is way off) Snowman, "I want a little bunny rabbit so I can love and hold, I will call him George" Which is a caractiture of a character in Of Mice and Men (Which I cannot think of the name of right now). I don't think Grawp intends to be dangerous, but because of his size and his mental ability he could accidently hurt someone and not realize it. Which doesn't make him a bad character, just one that needs a lot of patience. Hats off to Hagrid for trying. 5. Harry and Ron try to discourage Ginny, Luna and Neville from joining them to help Sirius in London. Why are they so opposed to these specific people? I tink it's because Harry is so used to Ron and Hermione helping him out, that he can't think outside of those two. What a good eye opener for him. Take the three most unlikely to volunteer and make Harry realize that everyone has strenghts. Although with Ginny hints have been dropped all the time about how strong she is; She tried to fight off Tom Riddle's diary (throwing it away); Comments made about how tough she is by her brothers. How she chastize Harry for not coming to her when he thought he was possessed. With Neville and Luna, we are only just starting to see their strenghts. Hints about Neville have been there from book one, but he is just starting to grow into more of a hero . mari From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Dec 6 19:09:41 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 19:09:41 -0000 Subject: Snape and Lupin's Character Arcs (was: Lupin's Char Arc) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119393 > Alla: > > Oh, I most certainly and emphatically disagree with that one. > McGonagall would certainly correct such a student, granted, but > not in the unprofessional and demeaning way used by Snape.< > > Pippin: > Oh, I think you are idealizing McGonagall a bit. JKR called her a > scary teacher. Here's an example: > > "HARRY POTTER!" > His heart sank fast than he'd just dived. Professor McGonagall > was running towards them. He got to his feet, trembling. > > "*Never* --in all my time at Hogwarts--" > Professor McGonagall was almost speechless with shock, and > her glasses flashed furiously, "--how *dare* you--might have > broken your neck--"-- PS/SS ch9 Do you think McGonagall was faking her anger? In any case, was it professional for her to scold Harry in front of the Slytherins. Wasn't he horribly humiliated thinking he was going to be punished, and was it fair to let him off only because the Gryffindor team needed a Seeker? Alla: OK, first of all the quote you cited was Lupinlore's not mine, but since I basically said same thing, just in different words. NO, I don't think I idealise McGonagall at all. She can be very tough, but thanks G-d, she is no Snapelike teacher, IMO. What you cited was her concern for Harry' safety. I see no humiliation there whatsoever. > Alla: Also, Harry did not ask to be singled out by Snape in class and ridiculed for not knowing something he could not possibly have known. < > Pippin: If Harry couldn't possibly have known it, how come Hermione did? Harry's humiliation came from thinking that other people did know it, Hermione and Draco in particular. It shouldn't be ego-bruising to think that some people in the class know more than you do...why get upset about it? Unless you have a swollen head, of course . Alla: The previous quote was again Lupinlore's not mine, but since I absolutely agree with it, I guess I don't mind again. How come Hermione did? because Hermione is Hermione, enough said. She usually knows things nobody else does. Harry's humiliation came from Snape's claiming that he is a celebrity and directing class attention to him. There were no assignments given yet as we earlier discussed, or at least I am of that opinion, so the fact that Hermione read all the books does not give Snape the right to ask those questions on the first lesson, IMO. Pippin: I don't recall that Snape has ever said anything about Harry's father in relation to a potions class -- the subject only comes up in relation to rule-breaking. Harry's father was known for that, and Snape had a duty to point out that he shouldn't be admired for it. Alla: I am sorry? I think the saying " about dead people we speak either good things or nothing" exists for a reason. Harry has a right to admire his dead father for whatever he wants, IMO. Snape has no right or duty to say such things to Harry,especially when they are in student-teacher relationship, IMO. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Dec 6 19:27:46 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 19:27:46 -0000 Subject: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 33 - Fight and Flight In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119394 > >2. Umbridge's months of arrogance and abuse of power finally meet their match with the Centaurs. How satisfied are we with this outcome? Janet Anderson answered: > It's satisfying on one level, but the spectacular departure of Fred and George (and Umbridge's departure while being chased by Peeves) were more so, because they were a direct result of her conduct at Hogwarts -- whereas the centaurs are not responding to any actual mistreatment but are ready to be hostile to any human they encounter (see 3 below). > > >3. Hermione's remarks to the centaurs nearly spell doom for her and Harry. What does this say about her understanding of them? > Janet Anderson answered: > Not very much, really. It says that Hermione is tactless and doesn't always pick up on other people's feelings, but we knew that. I think the problem here is that no matter how tactful Hermione or anyone else was, the centaurs they encountered were hostile, ready to take offense, and wanted to take out their resentment on someone. >From the centaurs' point of view, there was no difference between Umbridge and Hermione; they were both human and that was all that mattered -- proof that racism is not restricted to wizards and > humans. :( Carol responds: Yes, exactly. The centaurs' treatment of Umbridge is satisfying only from the primitive standpoint of revenge. She certainly *deserves* to be trampled underfoot by the centaurs for what she's done to the students, but she has done nothing worse to the centaurs than insult them, which really only merits similar insults in return. What's disturbing to me about the centaurs' behavior is that on the one hand, it's mob mentality, not much different from the Death Eater's tossing the Muggles at the TWT. In fact, Umbridge is probably in far greater danger than the Muggles, who were terrified and humiliated but probably would not have been dropped (although I could be wrong about that). What the enraged centaurs did or could do to Umbridge is best left to the imagination and is out of all proportion to what she did to *them*. Also, as Janet points out, the centaurs are ironically expressing a racist point of view themselves. "Near-human" is an insult in their view not because they see themselves as equal to humans but because they see themselves as superior, exactly as the purebloods see themselves as superior to Muggleborns and wizards in general see themselves as superior to Muggles, not to mention the superiority in their view of magical humans to other magical creatures. The centaurs' contempt for humans, magical or otherwise, exactly parallels the WW view of centaurs (and house-elves and goblins) expressed in the fountain in the MoM. Each sees itself as superior to the other and takes that superiority for granted. And when the mob mentality takes over, that supposed superiority turns ugly and the centaurs are no better than the Death Eaters, a point we may miss if we think only about our hatred and contempt for Umbridge and our desire to see her punished. Maybe Hermione was not as wrong as she appears to be, or at least not for the reasons usually expressed. She had viewed the centaurs as intelligent, rational, compassionate beings who recognized that "foals" should not be harmed. In other words, she took them at their own estimation as being in some ways superior to the humans of her acquaintance. But her estimation (IIRC) was based on Firenze, who clearly does not represent the centaurs as a whole. She misjudged them and misunderstood them, certainly, but she expected them to be less self-regarding and morally superior to their real selves. Note also their treatment of Firenze, who is not only banished but kicked in the chest by Bane (the most fanatical of the group) for daring to associate with humans. Nasty little blood traitor that it is. Carol, who certainly is not defending Umbridge but thinks that the centaurs' conduct is also indefensible From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Mon Dec 6 19:39:55 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 19:39:55 -0000 Subject: Voldermort's "death" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119395 whimsyflower (wildflower) wrote: I've spent some time musing on what it would take to kill LV, but then I looked at the prophecy again. It does not actually say that Harry has the power to kill LV. After Harry heard the prophecy in OOP, Harry assumed it meant he would have to kill LV, but the prophecy actually says Harry has the power to "vanquish" LV. What if vanquishing does not mean killing, but somehow redeeming? or emptying of evil? I wonder if somehow Harry forgives LV or sees some good in him, and because Harry does so, LV is vanquished or looses his power or becomes impotent or is rendered no longer evil? > > Alas, many more questions than answers, but I would love to hear > others' thoughts on these possibilities. Hi! Kim here: I (and other posters) had some thoughts on this topic probably back in Sept. or Oct. this year (can't remember the post nos. or titles, sorry), but I still think it's an intriguing question. By asking the question about vanquishing possibly not meaning killing, do you lean in the direction of a Lord Voldemort redemption? If so, I'm with you on that. I somehow doubt that Harry or anyone else will actually be able to "kill" Voldemort, because I don't think he's been killable for some time, not even after taking Harry's blood in GoF. I also don't think Harry is actually killable either, not by LV's hand at any rate. I think it would be quite a twist if LV survived the final battles, though it would be much less severe and final a fate for the evil one than some folks might wish for. It even seems likely that Harry's forgiving nature might make him forgive even LV. But I'd still like Harry to "vanquish" LV's evil nature. That's the main point, isn't it -- to stop the evil, not just to get even with LV? Whereas if Harry kills LV, what's to say he'll actually be dead, like last time he was "killed" back in Godric's Hollow and he didn't really die? Redemption would be a much more effective way of rendering LV powerless for good, and besides, as repayment for his crimes, he might then be made to do some really helpful community service, such as volunteer work in a Muggle orphanage... ;-) As to how to render LV powerless and possibly even good, I'd had the idea that LV could somehow be lured into that mysterious locked room in the Dept. of Mysteries and "neutralized" (that is, if being in there didn't just vaporize him instead...) Kim From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Mon Dec 6 19:07:39 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 11:07:39 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 33 - Fight and Flight In-Reply-To: <20041206114956.96593.qmail@web42107.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041206190739.29619.qmail@web53109.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119396 AnitaKH 's Chapter Summary snipped > Discussion Questions > > 2. Umbridges months of arrogance and abuse of power > finally meet their match with the Centaurs. How > satisfied are we with this outcome? > I rather liked it, Unbridge is so annoying and she thinks she's above everyone and everything, and finally she's put in place by centaurs, I loved it. > > 4. Grawp appears to remember Hermione, and he > reaches for her. How dangerous is he at this point? > He's still very dangerous, look what he did to the centaurs, but 'Herny' is Hagrid's friend and he misses Hagrid and wants him back, so she's the only one that can help him and give him any information. > > > 5. Harry and Ron try to discourage Ginny, Luna and > Neville from joining them to help Sirius in London. > Harry thinks, ...if he could have chosen any member > of the DA to join him in the attempt to rescue > Sirius, he would not have picked Ginny, Neville or > Luna. (p. 671) Why are they so opposed to these > specific people? > Ginny: Harry's overprotective of her, she's like his little sister, he's just watching over her. Neville: He's never been too good at DADA, so he probably thought Neville wouldn't help out so much. Luna: She just doesn't know them enough, she knows nothing about the order and about Sirius, so why would she want to go? Juli __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From R.Vink2 at chello.nl Mon Dec 6 21:15:24 2004 From: R.Vink2 at chello.nl (Renee) Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 21:15:24 -0000 Subject: Is Snape really THAT good in Potions?(was: Snape and the Kappa) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119397 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > >> > nor can we > doubt Lupin's statement that Snape is a superb Occlumens. He clearly > knows exactly what Occlumency is and how to do it, as well as what > Harry needs to do. Renee: There could be another reason why we don't need to doubt Lupin's statement. Maybe he knows Snape is a superb Occlumens because he's tried to use Legilimency on him once. What if Dumbledore let them practice together at some point during the first war, after Snape turned his back to Voldemort? I'm sure they'd have tried very hard to get the better of each other, and my guess would be that Snape succesfully kept Lupin out of his memories. This would make Snape a better Occlumens than Lupin is a Legilimens, which in its turn could have led Lupin to use the qualification 'superb'. Now I know you doubt Lupin is a Legilimens; as you wrote in a previous message: Carol: Nor do I think we have anything like conclusive evidence that Lupin is a Legilimens. We have only Harry's suspicion that Lupin is reading his doubts from his expression, which is perfectly possible and reasonable without Lupin actually knowing what those doubts are-- or that they involve the black dog he saw in Magnolia Crescent. Renee: But this is by no means the only occasion where Lupin seems to "read" someone. I'm sure the way he stared at Sirius "so intently it seemd he was trying to read his mind" (Shrieking Shack scene) has been mentioned before. And in OotP, in the chapter The Advance Guard, we have a similar description just after Harry wondered why so many wizards have come to Privet Drive. "'A surprising number of people volunteered to come and get you,'" Lupin said, as though *he had read Harry's mind*.' And this happens in the book where we first get acquainted with Legilimency and Occlumency. I'll admit all this still isn't conclusive evidence, but it does make it more likely that Lupin's a Legilimens, with the additional bonus that it would explain why he makes such a categorical statement about Snape's Occlumency skills. To me, it's a better explanation than assuming Lupin wants to compliment Snape. Renee From foxmoth at qnet.com Mon Dec 6 21:51:18 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 21:51:18 -0000 Subject: Snape and Lupin's Character Arcs (was: Lupin's Char Arc) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119398 > Alla: > > OK, first of all the quote you cited was Lupinlore's not mine, but > since I basically said same thing, just in different words. > > NO, I don't think I idealise McGonagall at all. She can be very > tough, but thanks G-d, she is no Snapelike teacher, IMO. > > What you cited was her concern for Harry' safety. I see no > humiliation there whatsoever. > Pippin: Oops! Sorry for the misattribution. I can make the same concern for safety argument for Snape. Harry is going to be attacked by adult dark wizards. They have no intention of waiting till he grows up. They are not going to fight fair. They are going to use every means in their power to defeat him, including unfair punishments and insulting his family. They would think it very clever to incite Harry to attack them or use illegal magic so they can have him expelled, executed or sent to St. Mungo's or Azkaban, all perfectly legal. If Harry can learn to deal with insults without retaliating, his survival prospects are going to go way up. The Dursleys weren't good practice for that-- it seems they were usually too dense to notice when Harry got back at them. > Pippin: > > I don't recall that Snape has ever said anything about Harry's father in relation to a potions class -- the subject only comes up in relation to rule-breaking. Harry's father was known for that, and Snape had a duty to point out that he shouldn't be admired for it.< > > > Alla: > I am sorry? I think the saying " about dead people we speak either good things or nothing" exists for a reason. Harry has a right to admire his dead father for whatever he wants, IMO. Snape has no right or duty to say such things to Harry,especially when they are in student-teacher relationship, IMO.< Pippin: I can't say I agree with that saying, not when the dead person is a historical figure, anyway. That kind of thinking leads to the lie of the golden fountain -- all the wizards of the past were wonderful people, so the civilization we inherited from them must be wonderful too. Bleh! Pippin From Vivamus at TaprootTech.com Mon Dec 6 21:57:53 2004 From: Vivamus at TaprootTech.com (Vivamus) Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 16:57:53 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Voldermort's "death" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041206165745.SM01064@devbox> No: HPFGUIDX 119399 > whimsyflower (wildflower) wrote: > I've spent some time musing on what it would take to > kill LV, but then I looked at the prophecy again. It does > not actually say that Harry has the power to kill LV. After > Harry heard the prophecy in OOP, Harry assumed it meant he > would have to kill LV, but the prophecy actually says Harry > has the power to "vanquish" LV. What if vanquishing does not > mean killing, but somehow redeeming? or emptying of evil? I > wonder if somehow Harry forgives LV or sees some good in him, > and because Harry does so, LV is vanquished or looses his > power or becomes impotent or is rendered no longer evil? > > > > Alas, many more questions than answers, but I would love to hear > > others' thoughts on these possibilities. > > Hi! Kim here: > I (and other posters) had some thoughts on this topic > probably back in Sept. or Oct. this year (can't remember the > post nos. or titles, sorry), but I still think it's an > intriguing question. By asking the question about > vanquishing possibly not meaning killing, do you lean in the > direction of a Lord Voldemort redemption? If so, I'm with > you on that. > > I somehow doubt that Harry or anyone else will actually be > able to "kill" Voldemort, because I don't think he's been > killable for some time, not even after taking Harry's blood > in GoF. Vivamus: You may be right, of course, but I'll toss my hat on the side that DD's "gleam of something like triumph" meant either that LV is now human enough to be killed, or in some way is now vulnerable to being destroyed by Harry, if by no one else. > I also don't think Harry is actually killable > either, not by LV's hand at any rate. I think it would be > quite a twist if LV survived the final battles, though it > would be much less severe and final a fate for the evil one > than some folks might wish for. It even seems likely that > Harry's forgiving nature might make him forgive even LV. But > I'd still like Harry to "vanquish" LV's evil nature. That's > the main point, isn't it -- to stop the evil, not just to get > even with LV? Vivamus: I fear I must disagree here most strongly. The entire series has been about making ethical choices and facing consequences. Always it has been choices that have been emphasized, not fate. Harry & co. will win because they choose to do so, albeit at great cost. Just as LV has remained alive because he has willed to do so, Harry will be able to vanquish him forever despite all odds because Harry's will is equally strong, and his heart is as good as LV's is bad. The other side of this coin is that choices always result in consequences. LV has made choices all along the line which are purely evil. Irrespective of how he got to where he is -- and there are probably some significant faults to be laid at others who had a hand in shaping him (Grindelwald, perhaps?) -- he nevertheless has chosen, as an adult, to be who and what he is. If any choices in life have irredeemable consequences, and we are not just chips in a mill race, then LV must die. A good example for comparison is the Star Wars saga. Darth Vader represents a figure who seems purely evil, and acts that way, yet Luke is able to redeem him. This may be what some are bringing to mind, if they are thinking about redeeming LV. But standing behind Darth Vader is the Emperor -- who not only merits death but receives it. In story terms, Luke was able to redeem his father only because there was a still darker figure behind him to take the fall. Even then, Anakin Skywalker could only be redeemed in death. LV does not have any such figure. In allegorical terms, he IS the Emperor; he IS the evil Galactic Overlord; he is the source of the evil that must be vanquished, not a victim of it. While there probably was some good in young Tom Riddle before he went the way he did, and there almost certainly were others who contributed to Tom's choices, it is Tom, ultimately, who must pay the price for his own choices. > Whereas if Harry kills LV, what's to say he'll actually be > dead, like last time he was "killed" back in Godric's Hollow > and he didn't really die? Redemption would be a much more > effective way of rendering LV powerless for good, and > besides, as repayment for his crimes, he might then be made > to do some really helpful community service, such as > volunteer work in a Muggle orphanage... ;-) > > As to how to render LV powerless and possibly even good, I'd > had the idea that LV could somehow be lured into that > mysterious locked room in the Dept. of Mysteries and > "neutralized" (that is, if being in there didn't just > vaporize him instead...) I think a "redeemed" Tom Riddle walking around doing good would be a source of suffering to Neville Longbottom (and hundreds of others who have suffered similarly at the hands of LV or his followers) *almost* as terrible as the loss of his parents in the first place. Vivamus, who is old-fashioned enough to believe that freedom implies responsibility, and some choices have eternal consequences. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Dec 6 22:05:26 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 22:05:26 -0000 Subject: Snape and Lupin's Character Arcs (was: Lupin's Char Arc) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119400 > Pippin: > Oops! Sorry for the misattribution. I can make the same concern > for safety argument for Snape. Harry is going to be attacked by > adult dark wizards. They have no intention of waiting till he grows > up. They are not going to fight fair. They are going to use every > means in their power to defeat him, including unfair > punishments and insulting his family. Alla: That's OK. I cannot make the safety argument for Snape, sorry. In McGonagall case we saw many times that she is geniunely concerned about the boy wellfare. In other words, we saw her expressing positive feelings towards Harry. I am still yet to see Snape doing that. And Snape as "mock enemy" for Harry? As I stated many times, I don't believe in it after OOP. Snape happily disregarded Dumbledore's orders about Occlumency. Yes, yes, Harry was wrong, but if Snape was concerned about his wellfare, I think he would have found a way to bring him back to his office, no matter how hard the task was. JMO, of course. > Pippin: I can't say I agree with that saying, not when the dead person is a historical figure, anyway. That kind of thinking leads to the lie of the golden fountain -- all the wizards of the past were wonderful people, so the civilization we inherited from them must be wonderful too. Bleh! Alla: James is not a historical figure for Harry, he is just his dad and I believe that he has a right to have good thoughts about him untill he finds about his faults on his own without someone who is so bitter that cannot forgive dead man and therefore feels the need to deprive his son of positive image of his father. From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Mon Dec 6 22:17:22 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 22:17:22 -0000 Subject: Is Snape really THAT good in Potions?(was: Snape and the Kappa) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119401 > Carol responds: > Almost certainly Dumbledore hired Snape to teach potions because he's > a Potions Master Neri: I remind you that there was another reason, quite a critical one, for DD hiring Snape. So how do we know what part of DD's reasons was Snape's brewing abilities? 50 percent? 10 percent? 0 percent? Any canon, please? > Carol: > and we do see evidence of his skill and knowledge in > most of his lessons. Neri: I'll give you that, he is certainly impressive. All this sweeping around in black robes and talking about "the beauty of the shimmering potion" and "stopper death" and "subtlety". Sure to impress first year and even fifth year clueless students, or muggles like us, and make us forget that (unlike McGonagall or even Trelawney) he never actually demonstrate in class how to do things properly. I'd feel much better about it if someone knowledgeable like Hermione (who supports DD's trust in Snape), or Fred and George (who show a lot of practical expertise in brewing) would just once in five books say grudgingly something like "the man's mean as hell, but he surely knows his potions". > Carol: > He can place the ingredients of a potion on the > board with a flick of his wand Neri: It seems he is the only one allowed to do the "stupid wand waving" in his classes ;-) > Carol: > evidence that he has memorized not > only the ingredients and their proportions but every step in the > process. Neri: Erm, I didn't know that this is evidence for memorizing. Could you point me to this canon? Anyway, Umbridge does the same trick. Is she also an expert? > Carol: > He knows when Neville's potion is the wrong color exactly > which step has gone wrong. Neri: More than that, when the class is brewing the Draught of Peace in OotP, Snape knows exactly in what line Harry made what mistake. However, I was a lab instructor for 5 years (anatomy, not potions, but I still finds JKR's descriptions hilariously accurate) and so this fails to impress me. Snape has been a teacher for 14 years and each year he saw 40-150 students (depending on which side of the how- many-students-in-Hogwarts debate you are) brewing each potion in the curriculum. He must have seen any common way of botching these potions many times, and the end results are pyrotechnically memorable. Trust me, after your forth year as an instructor you are already anticipating most of the trouble. It wouldn't surprise me at all if Harry's mistake was one of the commonest ways of botching this particular potion, and Snape was just waiting for something like this. In my own lab, after several years' harsh experience I used to highlight the hazardous parts in the instructions with something like: "Every year someone forgets the hellebore! You don't want to be that someone". Of course, I didn't find my students failing all that enjoyable. > Carol: > There is no reason to doubt that he makes all his potions and > antidotes himself. Certainly we know that he brews the wolfbane > potion, and there is no reason to doubt Lupin's word that it is > difficult to prepare and that the ability to do so is rare. Neri: Well, at the time when Lupin tells Harry about the wolfbane potion, Harry is very suspicious of Snape in general and the potion in particular, and it seems important for Lupin to stress that Snape isn't all that bad (he knows James' history with Snape and he doesn't want to tell Harry about it, but he also doesn't want it to repeat). So Lupin does have a reason to exaggerate a bit about the ability needed for brewing wolfbane and how helpful Snape is. In fact, considering how important this potion is in Lupin's life, it would be strange if he doesn't know how to prepare it himself. Perhaps he let Snape brew it for him in the first place only because Snape insisted that "he is the Potion Master in this school" and Lupin wanted to show his trust in him. I would have been much less doubtful of Lupin's words here if I had several other canon sources regarding Snape's expertise. It just seems strange that in five books Lupin is the only person to commend Snape's brewing abilities. > Carol: > nor can we > doubt Lupin's statement that Snape is a superb Occlumens. Neri: Again, Lupin wants very much for Harry to learn Occlumency, and he knows what Harry feels about Snape. He has a very good motive to stress Snape's abilities here and even exaggerate a bit. > Carol: > Occlumency, too, appears to be a rare > gift, and Lupin, unlike Sirius, appreciates that. Neri: I don't have the books with me, but didn't Lupin also tell Harry that even Sirius wants him to learn? Do you believe Lupin about Snape but think he is lying about Sirius? > Carol: > I won't get too deeply into Lupin's motives since they're a side issue > > As for Lupin being the only person to praise Snape's abilities to > Harry, he is certainly the best person to do so. Sirius won't even > acknowledge that Snape *has* any abilities other than casting hexes or > curses; Neri: So he does acknowledge Snape's ability in cursing. He also says in GoF that Snape is intelligent. So why won't he acknowledge his abilities in potions? Not even in sinister, Dark potions? Something like "Snape knew more illicit potions in his first year than half the students in their seventh year". Nothing. Zero. Nada. > Carol: > Dumbledore is primarily concerned with getting Harry to treat > Snape respectfully and understand that he is to be trusted. Neri: So he never found it helpful to tell Harry that Snape is a great potion master? Wouldn't that help just a bit with getting Harry to treat Snape respectfully? > Carol: > McGonagall, who treats Snape as a colleague and an equal even though > she's headmistress and he's half her age, has never questioned his > abilities. Neri: McGonagall doesn't speak ill of her colleges, but it is a bit strange that in five years she didn't have even a single praise for his ability as a potion master. > Carol: > And as someone else pointed out, even Umbridge notes that > Snape's students are ahead of where they ought to be according to the > Ministry's approved curriculum. Neri: Regardless of how much weight you ascribe to Umbridge's opinion, she's talking here about Snape teaching abilities, which is a different debate than his brewing abilities. > Carol: > It was his reference in class to polyjuice potions > that led Hermione to check out the book he had mentioned which > contained the recipe and when the ingredients were stolen from his > office, he knew immediately which potion they were intended for. Neri: Did he know? I don't have the books right now and I can't remember this part. Can you quote the canon that he did? > Carol: > There are probably additional examples, but I can't think of them at > the moment. Anyone? Neri: I was also sure at first that there are many more examples, but somehow I couldn't find any. Neri From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Mon Dec 6 22:33:16 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 22:33:16 -0000 Subject: The Darkness Within In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119402 Carol: > > For one thing, he still doesn't know the details of the > > Prophecy, either at this time or later. But he does know enough > > to suspect that Harry is "the one with the power," and it makes > > no sense at all (to me) that he would deliberately make himself > > vulnerable to the one person who can kill or destroy him. Neri: > We know that LV knows that Harry is "the one with the power to > vanquish the Dark Lord", but he doesn't know the parts about "mark > him as equal" and "and either must die by the hand of the other". > As I wrote, we can assume that LV doesn't understand he made > himself vulnerable to Harry, or that he does but he planed to kill > Harry immediately after using his blood. Either possibility > answers your question. > > It is precisely the prophecy that makes me think I'm right in > this. If I'm right, then this would be the second time that LV > fulfilled the prophecy by his own attempt to thwart it. I suspect > this is a nice theme that JKR uses to handle the paradox between > fate and free will. This also explains why DD is so adamant about > preventing LV from getting the rest of the prophecy. SSSusan: I'm a couple of days behind, so please forgive me for that. But Neri, could you flesh out these last two sentences a bit? I'm struggling to understand what you mean here. Siriusly Snapey Susan From bboyminn at yahoo.com Mon Dec 6 22:45:58 2004 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 22:45:58 -0000 Subject: Warlock/Wizard - was Asking JKR just one question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119403 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tonks" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > , then I would like to know the difference between a > > Warlock and a Wizard. > > > > They seem very nearly the same thing, but Harry and/or the > > narrator seem to be able to make a distinction. When Harry walks > > into a room, he seems to be able to single out Warlocks from among > > the Wizards and Witches. > > > > Just curious. > > > > Steve/bboymin (was bboy_mn) > Tonks here: > > I don't remember where in the books this happens. But as I > understand it a Warlock is a male witch. The term Wizard is the > highest level.. warlocks and witches are beginners. Rowlings > confuses the issue by linking witches with wizards. Probably > because it is too hard to explain it all. > > Tonks_op bboyminn: That's a good thought and certainly has some truth to it but... On at least two occassions Harry walks into a bar (Leaky Cauldron and Three Broomsticks) and specifically singles out raucous and rowdy Warlocks. In other words, in a room full of witches and wizards, Harry is able to specifically pick out the Warlocks. True, they may be male witches, but how does that distinquish them, how does that allow Harry to pick them out of a crowd? Only JKR knows for sure. Also, I doubt that a warlock is a beginner, since Earnie MacMillan is decended for 9 generations of Warlocks. He certainly wouldn't have said the equivalent of 'I'm decended from 9 generations of beginners'. Although, the possibility of a low ranking 'common man' type wizard isn't impossible, 'Warlock' could be the muggle equivalent of 'trailer trash'. Others have speculated that Warlocks are like soldiers, policemen, or other government worker that would be distinguished by a uniform. I have speculated that it is a regional distinction for the same thing. That is, in western Europe, they most commonly say 'wizard' but in Eastern Europe, the common phrase is 'warlock'. Although, I think both cultures, east and west, recognise the words as meaning the same thing and use them. Example, purely speculative, the International Confederation of Warlocks could have been founded in Berlin, and therefore choose the more locally common term 'warlock'. The International Federation of Wizard, speculatively, may have been founded in Paris and therfore uses the western reference. Again, both east and west would recognise and use the terms, but would more commonly refer to the regional preference. So, Harry may have recognised the Warlocks in the Leaky Cauldron by their Bulgarian accents. Earnie MacMillan's ancestry could be from Eastern Europe, and when referring to his family, he uses the Eastern term despite having lived his entire life in Britain (speculative). Pure speculation; not may people agreed with the regional idea. In general, I think wizard and warlock mean the same thing, yet, Harry is clearly able to make a distinction. Just a few thoughts. Steve/bboyminn (was bboy_mn) From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Mon Dec 6 23:21:16 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 23:21:16 -0000 Subject: Warlock/Wizard - was Asking JKR just one question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119404 bboyminn: > > , then I would like to know the difference between a > > > Warlock and a Wizard. > > > > > > They seem very nearly the same thing, but Harry and/or the > > > narrator seem to be able to make a distinction. > > > > Tonks: > > > > I don't remember where in the books this happens. But as I > > understand it a Warlock is a male witch. The term Wizard is the > > highest level.. warlocks and witches are beginners. Rowlings > > confuses the issue by linking witches with wizards. Probably > > because it is too hard to explain it all. > > > > bboyminn: > > That's a good thought and certainly has some truth to it but... > > On at least two occassions Harry walks into a bar (Leaky Cauldron and Three Broomsticks) and specifically singles out raucous and rowdy > Warlocks. In other words, in a room full of witches and wizards, Harry is able to specifically pick out the Warlocks. > > True, they may be male witches, but how does that distinquish them, > how does that allow Harry to pick them out of a crowd? > Valky: The word Warlock is said to be derived from Old English for Oath Breaker. Many who know this have contention with it's use as a synonym for Wizard or Sorcerer. It means traitor. I don't think Harry could instantly recognise a traitor unless they bore some kind of distinguishing mark on their person. He could, however, recognise a social outcast in a bar or some kind of derelict character. Perhaps Warlock in JKR's WW is the equivalent of Punk, Rebel or some like social distinction. It would seem in line with the accepted meaning of the term. Valky From foxmoth at qnet.com Mon Dec 6 23:43:54 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 23:43:54 -0000 Subject: Is Snape really THAT good in Potions?(was: Snape and the Kappa) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119405 > > Carol responds: > > Almost certainly Dumbledore hired Snape to teach potions because he's a Potions Master<< > > Neri: > I remind you that there was another reason, quite a critical one, for DD hiring Snape. So how do we know what part of DD's reasons was Snape's brewing abilities? 50 percent? 10 percent? 0 percent? Any canon, please? > Pippin: Snape seems to be younger by a good thirty or forty years than any other Hogwarts teachers except Quirrell and Lupin, also outstanding in their fields. He is teaching without assistance in a subject in which a NEWT is required for Aurors. If Snape needed help, Dumbledore could hire another teacher, but he hasn't. Not that that tells us about his practical skills, but it wouldn't tell us very much about Snape's potion making skills if he did brew something in class, since we only have seen up to fifth year anyway. Dumbledore asks Snape if he made the potion again for Lupin, so at least we have confirmation that Snape is indeed the one making the wolfsbane. Some of us think that Luna's mother was trying to make wolfsbane potion when she got killed, which would confirm that it is indeed difficult, but there's no canon for that. However, Umbridge expects Snape to be able to make veritaserum, and obviously doesn't think she can floo London to get some from the Ministry's stores, which implies that he is the Ministry's one and only source. Pippin From cunning_spirit at yahoo.com Mon Dec 6 23:59:49 2004 From: cunning_spirit at yahoo.com (cunning_spirit) Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 23:59:49 -0000 Subject: Snape and the Kappa: a Flint? (Was: Snape and Lupin's Character Arcs) In-Reply-To: <20041206133803.60386.qmail@web53101.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119406 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Magda Grantwich wrote: > > Carol: > > So, I'm suggesting, when she discovers that she was wrong about > > Kappas being found in Mongolia, she covers her own error by > > attributing it to Snape. > > > > > > I think it's more likely that Snape - with his, shall we say, unique > - personal experience of the Dark Arts would say that knowing the > habitat of an obscure Asian water sprite (or whatever it was) that > the average student might only run across on an extended foreign trip > is by no means the only standard of a teacher's competence in DADA > and that he is qualified to talk about the kind of Dark Arts that > students and their families are unfortunately more likely to > encounter in the current WW situation. > > Magda > > > Cunning Spirit: The thought occurred to me, and grant you, I'm probably just grasping at straws, but could it be possible that the error is not Snape's but Scamanders? What if Severus Snape's earlier edition of FBAWTFT from his own school days actually contained the errant information on Kappas. Then in the later editions Scamander finally caught and corrected this faux pas. Unless Snape eventually shelled out for and read the current edition, he may still be capable of mouthing incorrect lore about any number of magical monsters. From lea_petra at myway.com Mon Dec 6 23:18:32 2004 From: lea_petra at myway.com (mari) Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 18:18:32 -0500 (EST) Subject: Warlock/Wizard - was Asking JKR just one question Message-ID: <20041206231832.191AE397E@mprdmxin.myway.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119407 "Steve" wrote: > , then I would like to know the difference between a > > Warlock and a Wizard. > > > > They seem very nearly the same thing, but Harry and/or the > > narrator seem to be able to make a distinction. When Harry walks > > into a room, he seems to be able to single out Warlocks from among > > the Wizards and Witches. mari: My interpretation is that a Wizard is general a good person, a warlock is someone who is a little suspect. Same with Witch and Hag. But as I read more of the books I began to wonder if Hag and Warlock are Witches and Wizards that may have not received a public school education (like Hogwarts), but were homeschooled. Making them a lower class of magic user. Actually I am going to have to think about this a little more, because now I am very curious. mari From MadameSSnape at aol.com Tue Dec 7 00:13:41 2004 From: MadameSSnape at aol.com (MadameSSnape at aol.com) Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 19:13:41 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] RE: Warlock/Wizard - was Asking JKR just one question Message-ID: <1aa.2ce0fac4.2ee64fb5@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119408 In a message dated 12/6/2004 7:05:53 PM Eastern Standard Time, lea_petra at myway.com writes: My interpretation is that a Wizard is general a good person, a warlock is someone who is a little suspect. Same with Witch and Hag. But as I read more of the books I began to wonder if Hag and Warlock are Witches and Wizards that may have not received a public school education (like Hogwarts), but were homeschooled. Making them a lower class of magic user. Actually I am going to have to think about this a little more, because now I am very curious. -------------- Sherrie here: Yet isn't one of Dumbledore's titles "Chief Warlock of the Wizengamot"? Unless that's just a VERY archaic title, it would seem to imply a more positive connotation of the word... Sherrie (who never uses the word "warlock") [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Dec 7 00:14:23 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 00:14:23 -0000 Subject: Snape and Lupin's Character Arcs (was: Lupin's Char Arc) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119409 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > > Pippin: > > Oops! Sorry for the misattribution. I can make the same concern for safety argument for Snape. Harry is going to be attacked by adult dark wizards. They have no intention of waiting till he grows up. They are not going to fight fair. They are going to use every means in their power to defeat him, including unfair punishments and insulting his family. > > Alla: > > That's OK. I cannot make the safety argument for Snape, sorry. In McGonagall case we saw many times that she is geniunely concerned about the boy wellfare. In other words, we saw her expressing positive feelings towards Harry. I am still yet to see Snape doing that.< Pippin: Saving his life doesn't count? Quirrell expressed positive feelings toward Harry, I remind you. So did Fake!Moody -- and it didn't mean diddlysquat. Alla: > And Snape as "mock enemy" for Harry? As I stated many times, I don't believe in it after OOP. Snape happily disregarded Dumbledore's orders about Occlumency. Yes, yes, Harry was wrong, but if Snape was concerned about his wellfare, I think he would have found a way to bring him back to his office, no matter how hard the task was. JMO, of course.< Pippin: Um, what is the canon that Snape was happy about it? Harry challenged Dumbledore about Snape stopping the lessons, and Dumbledore repeated that it was a mistake for him to ask Snape to teach Harry. If it was a mistake in the first place, what was there to gain by perpetuating the error? If it would have helped that the lessons continue, don't you think Dumbledore could have snuck back into Hogwarts and continued them himself? Dumbledore asked Snape to do something Snape wasn't able to do, and saying he should have been able to do it because it was important is like saying McGonagall should have been able to save young Barty from the dementor. It was a mistake for Dumbledore to ask her to guard him, that's all. > Alla: > > > James is not a historical figure for Harry, he is just his dad and I believe that he has a right to have good thoughts about him untill he finds about his faults on his own without someone who is so bitter that cannot forgive dead man and therefore feels the need to deprive his son of positive image of his father.< Pippin: I don't see how anybody who remembered what James had been like before seventh year could have had a positive image of him. Even Sirius thinks he was an arrogant little berk. I know you think that Snape joining the DE's proves he was a bad person all along and deserved whatever happened to him. But we know that Regulus, who was younger than Sirius, joined the Death Eaters while their reputation was still respectable and tried to quit when he found out what they really were. He didn't know already, even though Bellatrix Lestrange was his cousin. So there's no canon that Snape joined the DE's because he wanted to hurt people and he knew they would give him the chance. Pippin From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 7 00:26:54 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 00:26:54 -0000 Subject: Positive image of James. Was: Re: Snape and Lupin's Character Arcs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119410 Alla previously : James is not a historical figure for Harry, he is just his dad and I believe that he has a right to have good thoughts about him untill he finds about his faults on his own without someone who is so bitter that cannot forgive dead man and therefore feels the need to deprive his son of positive image of his father.< Pippin: I don't see how anybody who remembered what James had been like before seventh year could have had a positive image of him. Even Sirius thinks he was an arrogant little berk. I know you think that Snape joining the DE's proves he was a bad person all along and deserved whatever happened to him. Alla: Oh? This is because of ONE scene? I certainly disagree. It will be interesting to hear the testimony of some other people who knew James before his seventh year. Sirius thinks that he was a berk only when they talk about Snape. By the way, I think that Snape joining DE proves that James and Sirius MAY have legitimate ideological reasons to dislike him. You know, something more than bullies beating up on poor victim. I most certainly don't think that Snape's joining DE proves that he is a bad person and deserves whatever happened to him. But this is all beyond the point. The point is that even if James was very bad person, Snape has no right to tell Harry so, at least untill they are in a different setting than Hogwarts. This is unprofessional and sadistic. Just my opinion, of course. From bob.oliver at cox.net Tue Dec 7 00:57:27 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 00:57:27 -0000 Subject: Snape and Lupin's Character Arcs (was: Lupin's Char Arc) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119411 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > > > Pippin previously: > > > It is also my opinion that Snape is teaching properly, as > properly is defined in the wizarding world, and therefore he has > no evil intent. << > > Lupinlore: > > Err, what's your point? Ignorance of the law is no excuse.< > > Pippin: > ::blinks:: ignorance of what law? Snape's conduct is not illegal, > or Hermione would have said so. She's quick enough to tell > Harry to complain when Umbridge crosses the line. Or do you > have canon to the contrary? > > If you are speaking of moral perfection, all the characters fall > short of it, and the question of whether Snape in particular needs > redemption is meaningless. > > Pippin No, not moral perfection. I am speaking of the fact that Snape is arrogant, abusive, and hypocritical. If those traits are tolerated in the Wizarding World, that is no excuse. Thus, ignorance of the law, i.e. ignorance of proper behavior and morality, is no excuse. Sorry, Snape is just in the wrong. Lupinlore From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Tue Dec 7 01:11:21 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 01:11:21 -0000 Subject: Positive image of James. Was: Re: Snape and Lupin's Character Arcs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119412 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > Alla previously : > James is not a historical figure for Harry, he is just his dad and > I believe that he has a right to have good thoughts about him > until he finds about his faults on his own without someone who > is so bitter that cannot forgive dead man and therefore feels the > need to deprive his son of positive image of his father.< > Valky: So true Alla. And I would say JKR would agree because she narrates sympathetically to Harry in his younger years, emphasising the faith Harry keeps in the words of Hagrid and Dumbledore that his parents were *both* admirable people. At this point the reasons for Severus' enmity is unknown, and his directing it at Harry is uncalled for. In OOtp Harry discovers for himself the flawed human side of his father and is able to empathise with the Potion Master's anger, at last. In the early years, to Harry, it appeared that SS bad feeling toward him was due to Snape having some warped idea of who Harry was without any rationality, Harry learned to live with this idea to a degree and became somewhat comfortable with an assertion Snape's mind would remain a mystery. The revelation that Harry's father actually *was* arrogant in the literal sense, has changed that. Now, Harry has to come to terms with the fact that his torment in potions class was a legacy left him by someone he trusted deeply. AND he has to come to terms with a new misgiving he has about Snape. That he *can't see* that Harry is *different*. Before 'Worst Memory', Harry did *not know* he was different to his father. He comfortably assumed that his father's school persona was much a mirror image of his own, and so it is safe to say he assumed that Snapes anger at James was unfounded. Now that he knows he is clearly quite different, he can only wonder why Snape chooses to tar him with the same brush as a bully. And hate it, no doubt. > Pippin: > I don't see how anybody who remembered what James had > been like before seventh year could have had a positive image of > him. Even Sirius thinks he was an arrogant little berk. Valky: And Lupin asserts Snape never wasted a chance to curse James, and that James shouldn't take *that* lying down. For some reason many *do* have fond memories of James the Boy. He was considered to be more a larrikin/lark than anything else, by the teachers at the HogsHead in POA, which is good evidence to the argument that James taunting of Snape was making light of something that many people could relate to as fearful thing, such as Dark Arts. Pippin: I know you think that Snape joining the DE's proves he was a bad person all along and deserved whatever happened to him. > Valky: I hope you don't mind me jumping in here, Alla, but Pippin, Alla LOVES Snape. I have seen her show her claws in defence of him many times, so I really doubt you're right. > Alla: > > Oh? This is because of ONE scene? I certainly disagree. It will be > interesting to hear the testimony of some other people who knew James before his seventh year. Sirius thinks that he was a berk only when they talk about Snape. > Valky: I just gave two other references to testimonies above, I am sure there will be more in book six too. From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Tue Dec 7 01:18:29 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 17:18:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Is Snape really THAT good in Potions?(was: Snape and the Kappa) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041207011829.23921.qmail@web53108.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119413 > Neri: > I remind you that there was another reason, quite a critical one, > for DD hiring Snape. So how do we know what part of DD's > reasons was Snape's brewing abilities? 50 percent? 10 > percent? 0 percent? Any canon, please? > > Here's some canon: we know that Snape has been teaching at Hogwarts since Harry was one year old, that he was approximately the same age as James Potter, and therefore when he was hired he was about 21-23 years of age. Since we know from JKR that there are no such things as wizard universities, we have to ask what his qualifications were as a potions man to enable him to be hired at so young an age. I really, really doubt that it was because he took good notes in his 6th and 7th years' potions classes. Therefore Snape must have spent some time learning more advanced potions studies than was available at Hogwarts. Most likely he was apprenticed to a Master. As an apprentice he'd be judged by the Master and the Master's peers and undergo some kind of certification or graduation to full-fledged Masterdom. Four years is about the length of time it takes to complete a university degree, and an apprenticeship might easily be the WW equivalent. Therefore I submit that according to the standards laid down by the WW, Snape is a Potions Master. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The all-new My Yahoo! - What will yours do? http://my.yahoo.com From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Tue Dec 7 02:16:18 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 02:16:18 -0000 Subject: Asking JKR one question (was: Predictions for book 6 and 7) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119414 Siriusly Snapey Susan responded: > > 1) Is Lupin evil? > > 2) Did Lupin fire the spell which caused Sirius to fall through > > the veil? > > 3) Is DD capable of becoming invisible? Carol adds: > I think if we're going to ask JKR questions (theoretically), we > might receive more detailed answers from "how" or "why" questions > rather than "yes/no" questions SSSusan: Ha! But I *want* a simple yes or no, thank you very much. That's WHY I chose these questions -- because I don't want a bunch of hemming & hawing and "she left the door open"s. I would love a flat- out yay or nay, esp. to #2. Siriusly Snapey Susan From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 7 03:00:57 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 03:00:57 -0000 Subject: Is Snape really THAT good in Potions?(was: Snape and the Kappa) In-Reply-To: <20041207011829.23921.qmail@web53108.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119415 Magda: Here's some canon: we know that Snape has been teaching at Hogwarts since Harry was one year old, that he was approximately the same age as James Potter, and therefore when he was hired he was about 21-23 years of age. Since we know from JKR that there are no such things as wizard universities, we have to ask what his qualifications were as a potions man to enable him to be hired at so young an age. I really, really doubt that it was because he took good notes in his 6th and 7th years' potions classes. Alla: For the record, I believe that Snape is an expert in potion making, but I'd like to argue other side. The fact that he was hired in such young age really does not tell me much. Why? Because as Neri said he could have been hired for ther eason which have nothing to do with his potion making skills. It could have been the need to protect Snape for example and Hogwarts could have been the best place to do just that. Pippin argued that Dumbledore did not hire any help for potion teaching, therefore Snape competency is not in question. That would have been very true, IF we did not see how many truly incompetent teachers Dumbledore hired . Do I need to start the list? Lockhart is one, Trelawney is another, etc. What I am trying to say that it looks like Dumbledore does not always care about professional qualifications of his staff and hires them for the reasons , which are known only to him. From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Dec 7 03:16:59 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 03:16:59 -0000 Subject: Positive image of James. Was: Re: Snape and Lupin's Character Arcs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119416 > Pippin: > I don't see how anybody who remembered what James had been like before seventh year could have had a positive image of him. Even Sirius thinks he was an arrogant little berk. < > > Alla: > > Oh? This is because of ONE scene? I certainly disagree. It will be interesting to hear the testimony of some other people who knew James before his seventh year. Sirius thinks that he was a berk only when they talk about Snape.< Pippin: McGonnagall said, "I don't think we've ever had such a pair of troublemakers." She doesn't think much of troublemakers, so I wouldn't call that a positive image. Lily said that James was just as bad as Snape. Alla: > But this is all beyond the point. The point is that even if James was very bad person, Snape has no right to tell Harry so, at least untill they are in a different setting than Hogwarts. This is unprofessional and sadistic. Just my opinion, of course.< Pippin: In PoA, it comes up *only* in the context of the Marauder's Map and Harry going outside the school, apparently to meet with Black. Snape isn't allowed to tell Harry that Sirius and Lupin were his father's friends, and know what might lure him out of school. In Snape's mind, James's arrogance led him to cooperate with these friends in a prank that could have ruined James's life. Later James refused to believe that one of these friends could be a traitor, and it got him killed. Snape *has* to warn Harry, because he sees that Sirius and Lupin could destroy Harry the way they destroyed James. In OOP, they weren't at Hogwarts, and Snape was talking to Sirius, not Harry. Sirius certainly wasn't behaving as if the context were professional. To his credit, Snape doesn't bring his old suspicions of Sirius and Lupin up in OOP, but that doesn't keep Sirius from treating him as if he was still a Death Eater. Pippin From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Tue Dec 7 03:21:13 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 03:21:13 -0000 Subject: Ginny/Neville/Luna (CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 33 - Fight and Flight) In-Reply-To: <20041206114956.96593.qmail@web42107.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119417 AnitaKH wrote: > 8. When Harry says, "Look, you three ?" he pointed at Neville, > Ginny, and Luna, "you're not involved in this, you're not --" (p. > 672) which molly-coddling member of the Order does Harry seem to > be channeling? SSSusan: Hee! He does kinda sound like Molly there, doesn't he? I never thought about it that way before, but I suppose in a sense mollycoddling may be what he's doing. Either that or he simply doesn't want the "responsibility" of 3 extra people on his head. And perhaps not these 3 in particular.... AnitaKH: > 5. Harry and Ron try to discourage Ginny, Luna and Neville from > joining them to help Sirius in London. Harry thinks, "...if he > could have chosen any member of the DA to join him in the attempt > to rescue Sirius, he would not have picked Ginny, Neville or > Luna." (p. 671) Why are they so opposed to these specific people? SSSusan: I think Neville & Luna are fairly obvious: Neville has had to work his butt off and, while showing some marked improvement, I'm guessing Harry & Ron aren't exactly overwhelmed with confidence in his abilities -- or in his self-confidence. How would he hold up in a truly dangerous setting, as opposed to the DA room amongst friends? Luna is...well, a flake. I know I'm biased because I don't care for her much, but she's just so OUT THERE. *I* wouldn't want to take her along either. Fair or unfair, that's how I'd feel in that moment. Ginny is a more difficult one to figure. Ron's easy -- she's his kid sister. Harry? Well, she could be Ron's kid sister in his eyes, too. Or she could be "too associated" with Neville (or Neville & Luna) and unfairly gets classed with them in terms of readiness or toughness or whatever. Or [ship moment here] maybe Harry's being protective of her? Whatever reasons we might want to come up with, it seems to me it really could be just a matter of what Harry's used to [his friends have proven their skills in "real situations" but the other three?], plus his not wanting to have to feel responsible for so many people. Siriusly Snapey Susan From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 7 03:57:38 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 03:57:38 -0000 Subject: Positive image of James. Was: Re: Snape and Lupin's Character Arcs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119418 Alla wrote previously: But this is all beyond the point. The point is that even if James was very bad person, Snape has no right to tell Harry so, at least untill they are in a different setting than Hogwarts. This is unprofessional and sadistic. Just my opinion, of course. Pippin: In PoA, it comes up *only* in the context of the Marauder's Map and Harry going outside the school, apparently to meet with Black. Snape isn't allowed to tell Harry that Sirius and Lupin were his father's friends, and know what might lure him out of school. In Snape's mind, James's arrogance led him to cooperate with these friends in a prank that could have ruined James's life. Later James refused to believe that one of these friends could be a traitor, and it got him killed. Snape *has* to warn Harry, because he sees that Sirius and Lupin could destroy Harry the way they destroyed James. Alla: I am sorry, you lost me here. Which Prank could have ruined James life? The one where he saved Snape's? Sirius' Prank? For all we know, it is quite possible that James did not even know about that prank beforehand. I also don't follow the part with Snape's warning Harry by talking badly about James about Harry's possible destruction by Sirius and Remus. I want to say that you are overreaching here, but I am not quite sure I even understand where you are going with this one. I apologise! In PoA, Harry is NOT leaving school. Hogwarts is in session. Snape IS his teacher. Pippin: In OOP, they weren't at Hogwarts, and Snape was talking to Sirius, not Harry. Sirius certainly wasn't behaving as if the context were professional. To his credit, Snape doesn't bring his old suspicions of Sirius and Lupin up in OOP, but that doesn't keep Sirius from treating him as if he was still a Death Eater. Alla: Morally, I cannot give Snape any credit for his behaviour towards Sirius in OOP, just as I cannot give Sirius much, but I was talking about PoA incidents only. From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Tue Dec 7 04:28:36 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 04:28:36 -0000 Subject: The Darkness Within In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119419 > Neri earlier: > > It is precisely the prophecy that makes me think I'm right in > > this. If I'm right, then this would be the second time that LV > > fulfilled the prophecy by his own attempt to thwart it. I suspect > > this is a nice theme that JKR uses to handle the paradox between > > fate and free will. This also explains why DD is so adamant about > > preventing LV from getting the rest of the prophecy. > > SSSusan: > I'm a couple of days behind, so please forgive me for that. But > Neri, could you flesh out these last two sentences a bit? I'm > struggling to understand what you mean here. Neri: Well, we already have in canon this strange twist, in the end of OotP. According to DD it was actually LV himself who chose to "mark" Harry, and by this fulfilled the conditions for Harry to be "The One". Why does JKR need this strange complication? It doesn't make the plot more thrilling, and things are already quite elaborate (as Carol wrote) without it. My guess is that Choice and Free Will are a main theme of the HP saga, and so JKR simply won't allow that the future of the WW will be decided strictly by a prophecy (that is, determined by fate). LV's choice was necessary here. In order to thwart the prophecy he decided to kill a baby, and only by this decision and action he actually fulfilled the prophecy. In a way it is a self-fulfilling prophecy ? it will come true only because Trelawney told it. But it can be self-fulfilling only because LV chose to go to any length in order to thwart it. Had he chosen not to act against "The One", then there would never have been "The One", and no one to prevent LV from conquering the WW. My theory just applies this same principle again: LV is sure that the Ancient Magic protection is the power that was foretold by the prophecy, so by using the blood trick he tries to steal it from Harry. As a result of taking this choice he ends up protected against everyone BUT Harry, thus again fulfilling the prophecy by trying to thwart it. Of course, this can only work if LV doesn't know critical parts of the prophecy, so he wouldn't realize that he's fulfilling these very parts. This explains why it is so important for DD to keep the rest of the prophecy from LV. Several list members (and me included) felt disappointed by the ending of OotP because the prophecy didn't seem to be such a great revelation. It was practically difficult to see why DD risked so much to keep it hidden from LV, especially as LV already knows half of it. But now I suspect that the prophecy was never meant to be a great revelation. What is important about the prophecy is precisely that LV knows half of it, and by trying to prevent this half from happening he causes the other half to take place. I'm not sure if I made it more or less clear :-) Neri From willsonkmom at msn.com Tue Dec 7 05:16:11 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 05:16:11 -0000 Subject: Is Snape really THAT good in Potions?(was: Snape and the Kappa) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119420 Neri wrote: > > After Nora found a textbook example that Snape might not be such an > expert in DADA as he is cracked up to be, I had a REALLY strange > thought: Why do we all assume that Snape is such a wiz in Potions? > I've raked my brains, and as far as I can remember the only canon > source for that is Lupin, who tells Harry in PoA that the Wolfbane > Potion is very complex and very few potion masters are up to it. Can someone corroborate Snape's expertise from a different source? Potioncat: Brace yourself, Neri... I think you have a good point. HPfGU!Snape is generally seen as a Potion Master (something like a StairMaster) one who is so skilled, he was Potion Maker to the Evil Overlord and never needed to soil his hands with less tidy crimes. We really don't know if he ever so much as looked at a cauldron as a DE. Snape is a Potions Master which translated into modern American English is a Potions teacher. It does not correspond to Master Carpenter or some such. The title alone does not mean he is far more talented than the standard wizard. Although one would always hope that a teacher knows more about his/her topic than the standard individual does. I can't recall anyone (other than Lupin) ever talking about Snape's particular skill in Potions although all sorts of people seem to know about his skill or interest in Dark Arts/DADA. We've been told by several people and by Snape that he first applied for the DADA position. So as fond as he seems to be of potion making (per his speech 1st year) he is more interested in DADA. Assuming he is telling the truth and the others are correct. However: Lupin comments on Snape's outstanding skill. You either believe Lupin or you don't. Snape was not in hearing when Lupin said it, so he wasn't trying to appease Snape. And I don't see any reason for Lupin to go out of his way at that point to make Harry trust Snape. (Now if it's ESE!Lupin trying to get Harry to trust ESE!Snape then you might be right.) By the same token, Lupin says he cannot make it himself and he apparantly trusts Snape to make it correctly...and in a non-toxic mixture. And for some reason, this isn't given to Madam Pomfrey to handle, so it's out of her expertice. Umbridge comments that Snape is teaching an advanced potion. How advanced that is that? Perhaps the ministry only wants the kids to be able to brew tea. But if is she is correct, and Snape's 5th years are surpassing the standards which have been in effect for years, then Snape must have more than the usual amount of skill. If he could barely squeak by, then he could hardly teach at an advanced level. And if the Ordinary Wizarding Level students are advanced, what are the N.E.W.T level students learning? We have Snape's word, not confirmed, that he has a high pass rate in O.W.L.s. I know, that doesn't show he is a genius potion maker, but if he didn't know his material, he couldn't get those results. Veritaserum: If Snape is correct and the ministry controls it, does the ministry know he has it? Of course, Umbridge asks for some, so she must believe he does. Does he make it himself? We don't have proof. But as Dumbledore trusts him to have it and to know its potency, he apparantly has faith in Snape's skills. Someone in another post used his abiltiy to magick the directions onto the board. Neri countered that teaching potions wasn't the same as making potions. But the atmosphere in Potions class is that Snape knows his stuff. He has an air of confidence. He knows what's going on. Neri also countered that with his experience running a lab session...but I offer that Neri must have known what he was doing as well, or he couldn't have managed. (I know the point is that it doesn't take a genius to do that and Snape's HPfGU reputation is a genius.) Neri also countered that Umbridge had memorised information, but it didn't make her talented. Umbridge very obviously did not know how to do anything. She didn't know beans about DADA nor about Potions. That is not the situation we see with Snape. McGonagall does not ever comment on his Potion Making Ability. Well, I don't know why she should. Although she doesn't believe in speaking ill of other teachers, she doesn't hesitate to drop hints. And she's never dropped any hints that Snape isn't up to speed. She doesn't really say anything except that he absolutely refuses to take anyone with less than an "O" into his NEWT classes. Now, if he wasn't better than than the average potion maker, why would he surround himself with exceptional students? Looking at the teachers at Hogwarts, I think most of us would agree that McGonagall, Snape, Flitwick and Sprout are all competent teachers, highly skilled in their areas. We would not be so enthusiastic for Hagrid, Lockhart, Umbridge, Trelawney and possibly Quirrell. And has anyone said that McGonagall is more highly skilled than any other transfiguration witch? Sure, she's an animagus, but we know 3 teenagers who could transfigure themselves. Yet there is something in her bearing and in the way her class is managed that indicates she is. I think the same is true of Snape. Now, what exactly is Snape's reputation with this HPfGU? He is a highly competent potion maker, possessing a skill above the standard wizard, and perhaps more highly skilled than those who make potions for a living. Sound about right? How far above that level is anyone's guess. And while we don't have a second quote on it, I think we've been shown enough to accept it. Potioncat From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Tue Dec 7 05:43:39 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 05:43:39 -0000 Subject: Positive image of James. Was: Re: Snape and Lupin's Character Arcs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119421 > Alla wrote previously: > But this is all beyond the point. The point is that even if James > was very bad person, Snape has no right to tell Harry so, at least > until they are in a different setting than Hogwarts. This is > unprofessional and sadistic. Just my opinion, of course. > > Pippin: > In PoA, it comes up *only* in the context of the Marauder's Map > and Harry going outside the school, apparently to meet with > Black. > Valky: How can this possibly be true? I wish I had POA with me so I look and see if you are right. Pippin: > In Snape's mind, James's arrogance led him to cooperate with > these friends in a prank that could have ruined James's life. > Later James refused to believe that one of these friends could > be a traitor, and it got him killed. Snape *has* to warn Harry, > because he sees that Sirius and Lupin could destroy Harry the > way they destroyed James. > > > Alla: > > I am sorry, you lost me here. Which Prank could have ruined James > life? The one where he saved Snape's? Sirius' Prank? For all we > know, it is quite possible that James did not even know about that > prank beforehand. > Valky: I understand where you're coming from Pippin and I quite agree that this is Snape's perspective, and it qualifies his actions. OTOH Alla makes a very good point that it is still likely that Snape was completely incorrect in his reckoning of James involvement in the prank. For the most part, in any case, Snapes perpective is impeded by his personal feeling toward Sirius James and Lupin, and *this* is what he is projecting at Harry. Snape's concern for Harry, if any, is never direct, what Snape directs at Harry is bitter clouded judgement and pent up anger, all very inappropriate, in spite of any fair reasoning he might hide behind it. Alla: > I also don't follow the part with Snape's warning Harry by talking > badly about James about Harry's possible destruction by Sirius and > Remus. > Valky: I do, as I have said, and although it may have been, given the circumstances, quite fair of Sevvie to consider Sirius and Lupin as treacherous and dangerous people, the problem is that more than it seemed true Snape really *wanted* it to be true. It gave him comfort to believe that the rest of the WW condemned Sirius long with him. this is more likely to be why he felt he needed to affirm and reinforce it to Harry. > > Pippin: > To his credit, Snape doesn't bring his old suspicions of Sirius and Lupin up in OOP, but that doesn't keep Sirius from treating him as if he was still a Death Eater. > > Alla: > > Morally, I cannot give Snape any credit for his behaviour towards > Sirius in OOP, just as I cannot give Sirius much. Valky: I am not sure that Sirius does treat him as though he was *still* a Death Eater, and besides Sirius had only just found out a matter of months beforehand that Snape *was* a Death Eater, so if he began to show suspicion towards Snape you couldn't blame him, really. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 7 05:47:08 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 05:47:08 -0000 Subject: Warlock/Wizard - was Asking JKR just one question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119422 Valky wrote: > The word Warlock is said to be derived from Old English for Oath > Breaker. Many who know this have contention with it's use as a > synonym for Wizard or Sorcerer. It means traitor. > > I don't think Harry could instantly recognise a traitor unless they > bore some kind of distinguishing mark on their person. He could, > however, recognise a social outcast in a bar or some kind of > derelict character. > > Perhaps Warlock in JKR's WW is the equivalent of Punk, Rebel or some > like social distinction. It would seem in line with the accepted > meaning of the term. Carol responds: What about Perkins, the old warlock who shares an office with Mr. Weasley? He doesn't seem to be a rebel or a derelict. (If "warlock" meant "derelict," surely it would be applied to Mundungus Fletcher?) And the name Perkins doesn't fit any better than Macmillan with Steve's hypothesis of "warlock" as a term for East European wizards (more or less refuted, anyway, by the Anglo Saxon etymology you refer to). Don't know about anyone else, but I'm as puzzled as ever by the term. Carol, who has "I am a Rock" running through her head for reasons that Potioncat will understand From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Tue Dec 7 06:12:34 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 06:12:34 -0000 Subject: Warlock/Wizard - was Asking JKR just one question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119424 > Valky wrote: > > The word Warlock is said to be derived from Old English for Oath > > Breaker. Many who know this have contention with it's use as a > > synonym for Wizard or Sorcerer. It means traitor. > > Perhaps Warlock in JKR's WW is the equivalent of Punk, Rebel or some like social distinction. > Carol responds: > What about Perkins, the old warlock who shares an office with Mr. > Weasley? He doesn't seem to be a rebel or a derelict. (If "warlock" > meant "derelict," surely it would be applied to Mundungus Fletcher?) Valky: Does your OOTP call Perkins a Warlock? Mine doesn't. I initially thought Punk or Rebel of sorts, because Harry had encountered Warlocks mostly in groups at bars, it seemed appropriate. Then someone posted to this thread to remind me that DD was Chief Warlock of the Wizegamot, which stumped me. So I have done a little more contemplating of the matter. The Wizengamot always conjured, for me personally, an image of a FreeMasons Club. An exclusive group of Gentleman wizards who are the powers behind the thrones as is the myth of the FreeMason. So saying that, I am still leaning toward Warlock being a social distinction, so I put forward that Warlocks are members of recognised social orders. What say you all? Carol: > And the name Perkins doesn't fit any better than Macmillan with > Steve's hypothesis of "warlock" as a term for East European wizards > (more or less refuted, anyway, by the Anglo Saxon etymology you refer to). > Valky: Yes, but I have to confess there is a word of European origin that has been considered as the source of Warlock, the Norse word "vorlukker" which means conjurer. Still it's not really meshing with Macmillan is it. OTOH a distinguished social order meshes nicely with Ernie's pride in declaring his lineage. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 7 06:38:53 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 06:38:53 -0000 Subject: Warlock/Wizard - was Asking JKR just one question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119425 Valky wrote: > > > The word Warlock is said to be derived from Old English for Oath Breaker. Many who know this have contention with it's use as a synonym for Wizard or Sorcerer. It means traitor. > > > Perhaps Warlock in JKR's WW is the equivalent of Punk, Rebel or > some like social distinction. > > > Carol earlier: > > What about Perkins, the old warlock who shares an office with Mr. > Weasley? He doesn't seem to be a rebel or a derelict. (If "warlock" > > meant "derelict," surely it would be applied to Mundungus > Fletcher?) > > > Valky: > Does your OOTP call Perkins a Warlock? Mine doesn't. Carol again: I thought it did, and I know I didn't invent the reference. But it just calls him "a stooped, timid-looking old wizard with fluffy white hair" (OoP Am. ed. 134), which at least gives a description of a particular warlock, if indeed he is one. The only other reference I found is in relation to the tent he lends to Mr. Weasley in GoF for the QWC (the one that looks like Mrs. Figg's house inside but doesn't smell like cats). Unfortunately all that one says is that Perkins doesn't camp much any more because he has lumbago (GoF 80). The quote I'm looking for, as I remember it, is "Perkins, an old warlock who worked in Mr. Weasley's office," but exactly where that quote occurs escapes me at the moment. (Geoff?) I did find almost that exact wording at the Lexicon http://www.hp-lexicon.org/wizards/wizards-o-r.html so clearly I didn't invent it. Unfortunately the textual reference is to GOF chapter 7, which gives us only the lumbago reference. But assuming that it's a valid quote and that Perkins is indeed a warlock, there's still the question of how that relates to the "rowdy warlocks" Harry has observed elsewhere (clearly younger than Perkisn!) and how he knows a warlock when he sees one. (Now hags are another matter; they seem to be part human, ugly old women who eat raw liver, essentially the "wicked witches" of children's stories and not at all what JKR means by a witch.) Carol, hoping someone will help her find that elusive little quotation From finwitch at yahoo.com Tue Dec 7 06:46:55 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 06:46:55 -0000 Subject: Is Snape really THAT good in Potions?(was: Snape and the Kappa) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119426 Potioncat: > Now, what exactly is Snape's reputation with this HPfGU? He is a > highly competent potion maker, possessing a skill above the standard > wizard, and perhaps more highly skilled than those who make potions > for a living. Sound about right? How far above that level is > anyone's guess. And while we don't have a second quote on it, I > think we've been shown enough to accept it. Finwitch: Yes well - let's see. PS: First class, the potion-speech. Also, he does question Harry about the bezoar, ingredients, and Draught of the Living Death. Apparently, he does know his stuff, or Hermione who memorized the textbooks, would have contradicted it - at least after the class. Later, Snape made that riddle, with Potions. Since this was a *Secret* method, I believe he made those potions himself. CoS: Hermione says Snape told them of the polyjuice potion and the book with the recipe - in passing. It is well possible that Snape brews the Skele-Gro (and other potions) for Madam Pomfrey, as I doubt she has time for that, really -- she needs to be on call, you know... PoA: Wolfsbane. Lupin's testimony that Snape brews it for him. GoF: Hmm-mm. Poisoning students to test their antidotes? Does Dumbledore know of it? And if he does, he'd permit this only if he really trusts that Snape had the skill for those himself. And Dumbledore asks him for *his* strongest truth serum. OOP: Well... apparently Umbridge trusts his skills enough to ask for the veritaserum. Oh and - incompetent teachers - (Lockhart, Umbridge) DO get criticized by the staff. Pomfrey doesn't approve of Lockhart, and EVERYONE is against Umbridge. None of them questions Snape's ability to brew a potion. I doubt that McGonagall would have the respect she has for Snape unless he did know his potions... I'd say that SS knows his potions. He'd need some lessons on teaching, though... Finwitch From imamommy at sbcglobal.net Tue Dec 7 06:51:21 2004 From: imamommy at sbcglobal.net (imamommy at sbcglobal.net) Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 06:51:21 -0000 Subject: Voldermort's "death" In-Reply-To: <20041206165745.SM01064@devbox> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119427 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Vivamus" wrote: > > whimsyflower (wildflower) wrote: > > I've spent some time musing on what it would take to > > kill LV, but then I looked at the prophecy again. It does > > not actually say that Harry has the power to kill LV. After > > Harry heard the prophecy in OOP, Harry assumed it meant he > > would have to kill LV, but the prophecy actually says Harry > > has the power to "vanquish" LV. What if vanquishing does not > > mean killing, but somehow redeeming? or emptying of evil? I > > wonder if somehow Harry forgives LV or sees some good in him, > > and because Harry does so, LV is vanquished or looses his > > power or becomes impotent or is rendered no longer evil? > > > > > > Alas, many more questions than answers, but I would love to hear > > > others' thoughts on these possibilities. > > > > Hi! Kim here: > > I (and other posters) had some thoughts on this topic > > probably back in Sept. or Oct. this year (can't remember the > > post nos. or titles, sorry), but I still think it's an > > intriguing question. By asking the question about > > vanquishing possibly not meaning killing, do you lean in the > > direction of a Lord Voldemort redemption? If so, I'm with > > you on that. > > > > I somehow doubt that Harry or anyone else will actually be > > able to "kill" Voldemort, because I don't think he's been > > killable for some time, not even after taking Harry's blood > > in GoF. > > > > > As to how to render LV powerless and possibly even good, I'd > > had the idea that LV could somehow be lured into that > > mysterious locked room in the Dept. of Mysteries and > > "neutralized" (that is, if being in there didn't just > > vaporize him instead...) > > I think a "redeemed" Tom Riddle walking around doing good would be a source > of suffering to Neville Longbottom (and hundreds of others who have suffered > similarly at the hands of LV or his followers) *almost* as terrible as the > loss of his parents in the first place. > > Vivamus, who is old-fashioned enough to believe that freedom implies > responsibility, and some choices have eternal consequences. imamommy, Encouraged by moonmyst's response to one of my previous posts, I am again going to jump into the fray with my pet theory: I think somehow Lord Voldemort will have his soul eaten my a dementor. I think that somehow Harry will trick LV into possesing him, and a dementor will Kiss Harry, but somehow Harry will retain his soul and survive to tell the tale. Here are links to my former posts, #119306 and #119223 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/119306 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/119223 imamommy who is going to keep bringing this idea up until it gets read a bit more widely, and I receive more replies because I'm really interested in getting feedback on it From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Tue Dec 7 06:55:57 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 06:55:57 -0000 Subject: Warlock/Wizard - was Asking JKR just one question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119428 > Valky wrote: > > > > The word Warlock is said to be derived from Old English for Oath Breaker. Many who know this have contention with it's use as a synonym for Wizard or Sorcerer. It means traitor. > > > > Perhaps Warlock in JKR's WW is the equivalent of Punk, Rebel or some like social distinction. > > > > > Carol earlier: > > > What about Perkins, the old warlock who shares an office with Mr. Weasley? He doesn't seem to be a rebel or a derelict. (If "warlock" meant "derelict," surely it would be applied to Mundungus Fletcher?) > > > > > > Valky: > > Does your OOTP call Perkins a Warlock? Mine doesn't. > > Carol again: > I thought it did, and I know I didn't invent the reference. and > > so clearly I didn't invent it. Valky: I certainly didn't infer that you did. > Carol, hoping someone will help her find that elusive little quotation. Valky: No need, I am not interested in bickering. I would rather discuss what a Warlock *may* be, than pick at faults in others postings. From caesian at yahoo.com Tue Dec 7 07:19:10 2004 From: caesian at yahoo.com (caesian) Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 23:19:10 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Apparation (Minerva McGonagall and Sirius Black (Was: Trusting characters ) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <49FD76A8-4820-11D9-8D58-000A95C61C7C@yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119429 > Arcum wrote: > > > Third, the concept of apparation hadn't been introduced until PoA. > > Dumbledore appears & disappears, but no one else does, and JKR > > may not have even planned it to be a widely available ability at > > the time. Minerva doesn't even apparate from Privet Drive in Ch. 1 > > of PS/SS. > > > > In fact, oddly, she never is mentioned leaving Privet Drive at all > in > > Ch. 1, which is interesting in itself... > > Carol responds: > I thought the same thing until I checked recently. > McGonagall, however, remains in cat form at least > until she disappears from Dumbledore's view--and ours. > > Similarly, Sirius Black probably changed to human form and apparated > to somewhere near Hogwarts (though not an open street in Hogsmeade) > when he followed Harry from Privet Drive to Hogwarts. Either that, or > the dog had a long walk! Caesian now: I believe that Sirius says at the end of PoA that he travelled, as a dog, from Azkaban to Hogwarts - making a detour to Privet Drive to see Harry (presumably in dog form the whole way - in fact, have we ever known Sirius to Apparate?). But, there is another sudden disappearance in SS: Hagrid. After Hagrid helps Harry back on the train after their day in Diagon Alley, Harry tries to watch him until he is out of sight, but he blinks, and when he opens his eyes again, Hagrid is gone. I've wondered if this means that Hagrid may be able to Apparate. Apparition is wandless Magic (I think), so his broken wand would not pose a problem. But, as Mr. Weasley explains in GoF, Apparition is difficult magic, and Hagrid admits to being "no great shakes at magic, really", so it seems unlikely. Perhaps he simply had a portkey handy. Cheers, Caesian [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From finwitch at yahoo.com Tue Dec 7 07:24:40 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 07:24:40 -0000 Subject: Warlock/Wizard - was Asking JKR just one question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119430 > Valky: > No need, I am not interested in bickering. > I would rather discuss what a Warlock *may* be, than pick at faults > in others postings. Finwitch: Hmm.. 'Chief Warlock of the Wizengamot' doesn't sound like warlock would mean outcast or slabby or any such thing. Not when linked to something like the Wizengamot. However, my guess is that, within JKR's novels warlock could be: 1) Ancient/old wizard or witch. (Being it's an old word). Maybe warlocks have white hair, making them clearly distinguishable? 2) A title. A warlock is elder/senior member of a governmental organization. Finwitch From gbannister10 at aol.com Tue Dec 7 07:56:45 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 07:56:45 -0000 Subject: Warlock/Wizard - was Asking JKR just one question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119431 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "M.Clifford" wrote: Valky: > The word Warlock is said to be derived from Old English for Oath > Breaker. Many who know this have contention with it's use as a > synonym for Wizard or Sorcerer. It means traitor. Geoff: Just adding a couple of odds and ends to the thread.... According to the Concise Oxford Dictionary, warlock is and archaic word for sorcerer or wizard (covers Dumbeldore?). It is derived from Old English "waerloga" = deceiver which includes the root "waer" = truth and is cognate with Latin "verus" = true and "loga" = liar. which seems a little contradictory. Truth liar? why not just plain liar? However. Re Ernie Macmillan. I doubt whether his family has East European roots unless they changed their name. MacMillan is a Scottish name. Re Perkins. I haven't spent much time in the past contemplating the difference between warlocks and wizards and so can't put my finger on anything to do with Perkins at this moment in time. From finwitch at yahoo.com Tue Dec 7 08:10:30 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 08:10:30 -0000 Subject: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 33 - Fight and Flight In-Reply-To: <20041206114956.96593.qmail@web42107.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119432 > 1. Harry "had the feeling he had had before in the forest, one of being watched by unseen eyes."(p. 664, Bloomsbury edition) We may presume this refers in part to the centaurs and forest creatures; are there other eyes watching him? Finwitch: Of course there are! Eyes that belong to demiguises (that ARE invisible) , golden snidgets, invisible wizards/witches (Dumbledore?) and only JKR knows what else. > 2. Umbridge's months of arrogance and abuse of power finally meet their match with the Centaurs. How satisfied are we with this outcome? I loved it - particularly when she's in the hospital later and Ron plays with his tongue.... It's hilarious, and well - to be defeated by Centaurs, classified as 'beasts' by the Ministry - well... > 3. Hermione's remarks to the centaurs nearly spell doom for her and Harry. What does this say about her understanding of them? She didn't *listen* to them. She certainly has lack in people-skills (even if she isn't the know-it-all anymore), particularly when dealing with non-humans. Harry deals much better with them... I dunno, maybe Hermione would have done better to express gratitude, say that Umbridge made them to, or whatever (child-like behaviour). When she and Harry were with Hagrid - they let him go for the sake of the 'foals' - but now, attacking Umbridge... they obviously don't consider Hermione/Harry as foals anymore. > 4. Grawp appears to remember Hermione, and he reaches for her. How dangerous is he at this point? Well... Grawp was saving their lives. Still, the giant was obviously quite dangerous to the Centaurs, was he not? > 5. Harry and Ron try to discourage Ginny, Luna and Neville from joining them to help Sirius in London. Harry thinks, "...if he could have chosen any member of the DA to join him in the attempt to rescue Sirius, he would not have picked Ginny, Neville or Luna." (p. 671) Why are they so opposed to these specific people? Harry wouldn't have wanted *any* company, as it would risk their lives. Still, he *has* seen Ron and Hermione to join him in dangerous tasks since their first year, and he knows that he can't stop Hermione&Ron - and those two best friends CAN fight, they don't panic in danger. > 6. In the forest, Harry appears to vent his fury at Hermione as an outlet for his fear and anger at himself. Is this a pattern? Well, Harry needs to vent himself out *somehow*, does he not? Hermione just happens to be there for it. > 7. Umbridge says to Harry: "The Ministry places a rather higher value on my life than yours, > > I'm afraid." (P. 663) Is this true in fact or just in Umbridge's own mind? How do her dealings > > with the centaurs reflect upon Umbridge's self-supposed importance? In Umbridge's and Fudge's mind it is true, and her self-importance sure only angered the Centaurs even more. > 8. When Harry says, "Look, you three ?" he pointed at Neville, Ginny, and Luna, "you're not involved in this, you're not --" (p. 672) which molly-coddling member of the Order does Harry seem to be channeling? Molly, of course ... trying to keep Harry & her kids from dealings of the Order, the Triwizards... but I suppose it's just Harry's fear for their lives. (much like it is Molly's, remember her boggart) Finwitch From finwitch at yahoo.com Tue Dec 7 08:15:25 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 08:15:25 -0000 Subject: Warlock/Wizard - was Asking JKR just one question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119433 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" > Geoff: > Just adding a couple of odds and ends to the thread.... > > According to the Concise Oxford Dictionary, warlock is and archaic > word for sorcerer or wizard (covers Dumbeldore?). It is derived from > Old English "waerloga" = deceiver which includes the root "waer" = > truth and is cognate with Latin "verus" = true and "loga" = liar. > which seems a little contradictory. Truth liar? why not just plain > liar? However. Finwitch: Why not the Logos - meaning 'study, science, etc.' common in words like Bio(life)logy. As such, if waer- verita -truth holds true, why not some sort of waerlogos - a searcher of the truth - suitable for Chief Warlock of Wizengamot, don't you think? Finwitch From bboyminn at yahoo.com Tue Dec 7 09:02:31 2004 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 09:02:31 -0000 Subject: Warlock/Wizard - was Asking JKR just one question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119434 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "M.Clifford" > wrote: > > Valky: > > The word Warlock is said to be derived from Old English for Oath > > Breaker. ... It means traitor. > Geoff: > Just adding a couple of odds and ends to the thread.... > > According to the Concise Oxford Dictionary, warlock is and archaic > word for sorcerer or wizard (covers Dumbeldore?). It is derived from > Old English "waerloga" = deceiver which includes the root "waer" = > truth and is cognate with Latin "verus" = true and "loga" = liar. > which seems a little contradictory. Truth liar? why not just plain > liar? However. > bboyminn: While it can certainly be helpful, and many time is, I think we need to be careful about putting too much stock in word origins. We can find many words in the English language whose modern common usage don't fit their ancient origins. In Geof's example of 'Truth Liar', let's think of magicians and magic; for this example, let's consider Stage Magic. Stage Magic is both the truth and a lie. What we see is unbelievable, sometime appearing impossible, yet the magician's action are real and true, he really does make the 'thing' disappear, however, what we see is an illusion. The object in questions has vanished, but not the way it appears to have vanished. So to really magic, as in Potterverse magic, is real. To a Muggle, the appearance of Harry Potter style magic is both a lie and the truth. The Muggle sees what he sees and knows that it is real, but at the same time can only explain it by saying it is a trick. Again, we see both true and lie wrapped into one. I'm not saying that's the correct interpretation of the origins of Warlock, only showing that it's possible to create a path of logic that is not so inconsistent with modern usage. In general, I think all societies (in the books) treat the words Wizard and Warlock as one and the same, just as they sometimes say 'sorcerer', it's just a question of who gives which word priority and why. The best I can come up with is something cultural. Maybe it's not East vs West, maybe it's North vs South, or possibly slightly archaic vs modern. Or, rather than regional, as I suggested, maybe it's based on language origins. French, Spanish, English, and Italian have strong origins in Latin, but I suspect German and similar languages have their origins elsewhere. Maybe it's aristocratic vs common language. I readily admit all of these above, and all of the suggestions by others are flawed in some way. Someone suggested it was similar to Freemasons, and that could be, but why would Freemason be typified as wild, rowdy, and raucous. Not shooting down just the Freemason idea specifically, just trying to show that, so far, none of the ideas I've heard, including my own, quite fit the bill. That's why I think it would be a good question to ask JKR, especially if it were in a situation where she wasn't rushed to answer as many questions as possible as in the on-line chats. Also, there are some fantastic question we would all like to ask, but what are the chance that they would actually be answered. The 'Warlock' question is one that I think has a chance of being answered. Just a few thoughts. Steve/bboyminn (was bboy_mn) From finwitch at yahoo.com Tue Dec 7 09:19:36 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 09:19:36 -0000 Subject: Flamels (was: Harry's Protection (was Re: Questions) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119435 > Kneasy: > > The Flamels - yes. I can't help but feel that they're important somehow. > We still haven't had confirmation that they're actually dead. I did once > suggest that DD was Nicholas Flamel's partner and had much more to > do with the Stone than being its guardian - he might even have used it. > But really I don't think that Voldy grasping for immortality is so terrible > in itself - it's just what he'd do with his life if he was unkillable. Finwitch: I came with this idea: Nicholas Flamel (or his wife) is the Head of the Department of Mysteries. Instead of destroying the Stone, they hid it behind the Veil. (As good as gone, then?) And that means Sirius can return. Oh, and Nicolas studies death - he goes behind the Veil and comes back - only surviving with the Elixir. And er-- with the Alchemist-theory on Dumbledore's raising Harry -- well, only one to be truly able to question the wisdom of Dumbledore's actions is Nicholas Flamel, who's way better in the field of Alchemy than Albus ever. And er - could he be the original St Nicholas? Giving out gifts to nice people, you know? (Out of fireplace: Nah, forget the roof, he's using Floo powder! He can use Time-turner and Elixir of Life to be done with it during one night...) No one comes up with any questions, it's Christmas Magic, you know... And, he probably does have loads of (house-)elves working to help him out... Finwitch From gbannister10 at aol.com Tue Dec 7 11:26:03 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 11:26:03 -0000 Subject: Warlock/Wizard - was Asking JKR just one question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119436 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: bboyminn: > The best I can come up with is something cultural. Maybe it's not East > vs West, maybe it's North vs South, or possibly slightly archaic vs > modern. Or, rather than regional, as I suggested, maybe it's based on > language origins. French, Spanish, English, and Italian have strong > origins in Latin, but I suspect German and similar languages have > their origins elsewhere. Maybe it's aristocratic vs common language. Geoff: Continuing my odds and ends.... French, Spanish and Italian - and also Portuguese and Romanian among others - are the so-called Romance group which have developed, as you say, from Latin. German and associated languages developed from the Teutonic group. English, because of its Anglo-Saxon ancestry and the strong influence of French after 1066, is a bit of a half-blood. :-) It has links to both sides which is why it is such an expressive language and also a darned difficult one for non-native speakers to master. Interestingly though, there is a link between Old English and Latin with "loga". This sometimes happens in the two groups but usually in words which refer to new developments and are borrowed. ("Window" in many langauaes is an example). In modern German also, the verb "to lie" is "luegen" (which should correctly have an umlaut rather than an "e" but !Yahoo doesn't want to know about it.... From Vivamus at TaprootTech.com Tue Dec 7 13:00:50 2004 From: Vivamus at TaprootTech.com (Vivamus) Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 08:00:50 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Flamels (was: Harry's Protection (was Re: Questions) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200412070801711.SM01064@devbox> No: HPFGUIDX 119437 > > Kneasy: > > > The Flamels - yes. I can't help but feel that they're important > somehow. > > We still haven't had confirmation that they're actually dead. I did > > once suggest that DD was Nicholas Flamel's partner and had > much more > > to do with the Stone than being its guardian - he might > even have used it. > > But really I don't think that Voldy grasping for immortality is so > terrible > > in itself - it's just what he'd do with his life if he was > unkillable. > > Finwitch: > > I came with this idea: Nicholas Flamel (or his wife) is the > Head of the Department of Mysteries. Instead of destroying > the Stone, they hid it behind the Veil. (As good as gone, > then?) And that means Sirius can return. > > Oh, and Nicolas studies death - he goes behind the Veil and comes back > - only surviving with the Elixir. > > And er-- with the Alchemist-theory on Dumbledore's raising > Harry -- well, only one to be truly able to question the > wisdom of Dumbledore's actions is Nicholas Flamel, who's way > better in the field of Alchemy than Albus ever. > > And er - could he be the original St Nicholas? Giving out > gifts to nice people, you know? (Out of fireplace: Nah, > forget the roof, he's using Floo powder! He can use > Time-turner and Elixir of Life to be done with it during one > night...) No one comes up with any questions, it's Christmas > Magic, you know... And, he probably does have loads of > (house-)elves working to help him out... > > Finwitch Vivamus: Nice ideas about Nicholas, Finwitch. I think you and Kneasy are both right, in that he may well be in the rest of the series somehow. He cannot be the real St. Nicholas, of course -- the real one lived in modern-day Turkey in the 4th century -- but the illustration is wonderful. If you think about his name, though, he is not only an alchemist (and alchemy was associated with some of the darkest forms of medieval magic,) Old Nick (a name for the devil, btw) was supposedly dying at age 666, and his last name means in Flames. That is a *lot* of devil-association attached to one name. A little too much to be coincidence, or even a throw-away character -- and this is DD's former partner. Everyone seems to *know* DD has great dark powers, even though he's too good to use them. *How* does everyone know this about DD? The only reason I can imagine is that he has demonstrated that kind of power in the past. I suspect DD has some past associations that may not be the most wholesome. The defeat of the dark wizard Grindelwald in 1945 was mentioned prominently in the first book, as was Flamel, but heither has surfaced since. I have a feeling that Grindelwald, DD, and the Flamels will be tied together in some way in the remaining books. Perhaps DD has compassion for Tom Riddle because DD wasn't so different when he was young? While we're on the subject of old wizards, has anyone else wondered if Mr. Ollivander has been around since 300 BC, instead of just being the most recent descendent in that line? Vivamus, whose friend Snickersqueak is approaching his 126th birthday in cat years From Vivamus at TaprootTech.com Tue Dec 7 13:28:39 2004 From: Vivamus at TaprootTech.com (Vivamus) Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 08:28:39 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Voldermort's "death" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200412070829674.SM01064@devbox> No: HPFGUIDX 119438 > imamommy: > > Encouraged by moonmyst's response to one of my previous > posts, I am again going to jump into the fray with my pet > theory: I think somehow Lord Voldemort will have his soul > eaten my a dementor. I think that somehow Harry will trick > LV into possesing him, and a dementor will Kiss Harry, but > somehow Harry will retain his soul and survive to tell the tale. > > Here are links to my former posts, #119306 and #119223 > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/119306 > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/119223 > > imamommy > who is going to keep bringing this idea up until it gets read > a bit more widely, and I receive more replies because I'm > really interested in getting feedback on it Vivamus: It's a very interesting idea, but what would keep LV from abandoning Harry as soon as the dementors approach? Of course, if LV's body gets destroyed, and he somehow joins with Harry *after* that, then he has nowhere else to go but oblivion. I would NOT like to see LV as a ghost (shudder). Based on a charm by DD when Harry was an infant, perhaps, so that Harry's soul would be the one to stay and LV's would be the one to be sucked out? It seems a bit of a stretch, but it could be so. It would also imply that most of Harry's magical powers (and perhaps his scar) could disappear as well, although I would not like to see that. As the heir-apparent to DD, I would like to think that Harry will come out of this with his powers intact, if not his virtue. And no, I don't think his virtue is going to be intact. His Godfather has died because of his bad choices, and I don't think he has anyone he trusts enough to listen to about changing -- with the possible exceptions of Luna and Ginny -- so I think he is going to make even worse decisions in HBP, with even worse consequences -- mainly the death of DD. The guilt from that is finally going to get his attention and settle him down, as he realizes that he is only human, after all. Or, how about this? Harry's bad choices cause the deaths of the Dursleys. In some ways, that would be even worse than causing the death of DD, because the Dursleys, as bad as they are to Harry, are not a part of the WW, are not a part of the war, and haven't done anything EXCEPT provide shelter for a child who, it turned out, really was a mortal danger to them all. Sure, they have been horrible to Harry. But they would much rather have simply been left alone; they were awful to him because he was an unwelcome danger in their home. If they die as a result of Harry's carelessness/recklessness/stupidity/whatever, Harry will have to deal with the fact that (1) he really was as dangerous to the Dursleys as their awful treatment of him implied, and (2) he repaid their grudging hospitality by getting them all killed. Talk about mixed emotions! The feelings over that could even be the fulcrum on which Harry's final choice ultimately hinges -- to be TR/LV, or to be DD. On the one hand, he can quite easily say, "yes! No more Dursleys!" and he is well on his way to the dark side. On the other, he can realize what he has done, and finally slow down enough to take an honest look at himself. Vivamus From tinainfay at msn.com Tue Dec 7 13:36:36 2004 From: tinainfay at msn.com (mrs_sonofgib) Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 13:36:36 -0000 Subject: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 33 - Fight and Flight In-Reply-To: <20041206114956.96593.qmail@web42107.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119439 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, AnitaKH wrote: > > With many thanks to PenapartElf, the following is respectfully submitted: > > > > Chapter 33 ? Fight and Flight > > > > > > > > 2. Umbridge's months of arrogance and abuse of power finally meet their match with the Centaurs. How satisfied are we with this outcome? I thoroughly enjoyed it! I love her screams as she is being carried off. I loved how she kept digging her own grave (so to speak) with every word she spoke to them (so arrogant!) I mean, she clearly is so full of herself that she would be so rude to a HERD of centaurs. > > > > 3. Hermione's remarks to the centaurs nearly spell doom for her and Harry. What does this say about her understanding of them? Man, I just wanted Hermione to shut up! With every word she spoke it got worse and worse (kind of like Umbridge...). She has the book knowledge but clearly needs to work on her understanding of applying some of that knowledge. > > > > 4. Grawp appears to remember Hermione, and he reaches for her. How dangerous is he at this point? Well, by mere size he is still quite dangerous. Seems he may be more dangerous because of size and stupidity than because of malice (Hagrid seems to have made some progress). > > > > 5. Harry and Ron try to discourage Ginny, Luna and Neville from joining them to help Sirius in London. Harry thinks, "...if he could have chosen any member of the DA to join him in the attempt to rescue Sirius, he would not have picked Ginny, Neville or Luna." (p. 671) Why are they so opposed to these specific people? Well, Neville because he is Neville. Neville is making progress (hooray for Neville) but he still has his reputation to fight against. Remember when the DA first met and he had no partner. I can think of many times when Neville makes a blunder in practicing magic. Ginny was one of the younger members of the DA. And Luna is ... Luna (again reputation, not necessarily magical ability). > > > > 6. In the forest, Harry appears to vent his fury at Hermione as an outlet for his fear and anger at himself. Is this a pattern? > Well, yeah I guess... > 7. Umbridge says to Harry: "The Ministry places a rather higher value on my life than yours, I'm afraid." (P. 663) Is this true in fact or just in Umbridge's own mind? How do her dealings with the centaurs reflect upon Umbridge's self-supposed importance? > Ok. This is the question I really wanted to get to. Every time I listen to OotP it makes me laugh. I always think or comment to hubby, "Yeah right! Savior of the wizarding world or some ministry official that is easily replaced!!!" I guess she (in her self-important mind) and some in the Ministry might value her life more but that is only because they haven't got a clue. If they knew who Harry is then surely their opinion would be different. > > > 8. When Harry says, "Look, you three ?" he pointed at Neville, Ginny, and Luna, "you're not involved in this, you're not --" (p. 672) which molly-coddling member of the Order does Harry seem to be channeling? > > Sounds a lot like Molly. Poor Harry, he just can't catch a break. > Thanks! I love Order of the Phoenix and can't wait for the next few chapter discussions! We're getting to the good part (bad part?)! ~tina > > akh, who is mystified why discussion point 7 won't format correctly > > > > > From Vivamus at TaprootTech.com Tue Dec 7 14:19:08 2004 From: Vivamus at TaprootTech.com (Vivamus) Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 09:19:08 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 33 - Fight and Flight In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200412070919495.SM01064@devbox> No: HPFGUIDX 119440 > > 3. Hermione's remarks to the centaurs nearly spell doom for her and > Harry. What does this say about her understanding of them? > > Tina: > Man, I just wanted Hermione to shut up! With every word she > spoke it got worse and worse (kind of like Umbridge...). She > has the book knowledge but clearly needs to work on her > understanding of applying some of that knowledge. Vivamus: Me too on wanting her to shut up, but isn't it interesting that she *didn't* shut up? How she did not respect the Centaurs enough to stop what she was doing and think when they reacted badly? I thought it was almost *exactly* like Umbridge. I wondered if perhaps JKR isn't making the point that there isn't as much difference between the "good" and "bad" characters as our fantasy-trained minds would have us believe. Hermione is far more intelligent than DU, but made the same stupid blunder (and it was stupid not in a lack of understanding the Centaurs in the first place, but in not shutting up and thinking when they reacted badly to the first statement.) To me, it shows that even the brightest and best have to tread carefully at times, and even the best of intentions can cause bad things to happen, if actions are not done with respect for others. DU was a fairly simple character, for all her power and abuses, so there isn't a whole lot we can learn from her encounter with the Centaurs. Hermione, as a much more complex character, can show us more. Remember how much trouble she caused Harry by minding his business and doing his moral thinking for him? Remember her deleting his potion? Here is an example of Hermione, once again, showing the same disrespect for other persons' free choices, and potentially causings some very serious consequences. She was rescued by very unlikely timing in the form of Grawp, but she almost got herself and Harry killed (and may yet, if they have to go into the forest again. The Centaurs aren't likely to let their humiliation with Grawp go by, and are likely to blame Harry and Hermione for it.) I liked the scene, because it showed a definite character flaw on the part of "perfect" Hermione. She is certainly bright enough to learn from it, but I don't think she will. She has a huge blind spot when it comes to other people's freedom -- the house elves are a perfect example of that. She knows what is "best" for them and they do not. She is going to give it to them even if it gets everyone killed in a WW race war. In that respect, Hermione and DU are not all that different. The question for me is whether Hermione is going to learn to let other people make their own choices. I think she will by the end of the series, but only because I think JKR really wants Hermione to mature into a healthy adult (well, I do, too.) But I don't think the encounter with the Centaurs was sufficiently disastrous enough to get her attention. In her own way, I think she is as blind as Hagrid is about monsters -- and that may well be JKR's point. Vivamus From quigonginger at yahoo.com Tue Dec 7 14:55:14 2004 From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger) Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 14:55:14 -0000 Subject: Warlock/Wizard - was Asking JKR just one question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119441 Carol wondered where she had heard Perkins referred to as a warlock: > I thought it did, and I know I didn't invent the reference. But it > just calls him "a stooped, timid-looking old wizard with fluffy white > hair" (OoP Am. ed. 134), which at least gives a description of a > particular warlock, if indeed he is one. The only other reference I > found is in relation to the tent he lends to Mr. Weasley in GoF for > the QWC (the one that looks like Mrs. Figg's house inside but doesn't > smell like cats). Unfortunately all that one says is that Perkins > doesn't camp much any more because he has lumbago (GoF 80). The quote > I'm looking for, as I remember it, is "Perkins, an old warlock who > worked in Mr. Weasley's office," but exactly where that quote occurs > escapes me at the moment. (Geoff?) Ginger: I'm not Geoff, although I like his posts, but if you both don't mind... In chapter 3 of CoS, Ron, Fred and George pick Harry up to take him to the Burrow. Harry asks how they knew he was in trouble. Ron reminds him that Arthur works for the MoM. Harry asks what he does. Ron tells him about it and comments "it's only him and an old warlock called Perkins in the office". (US paperback p. 31) I had the idea the warlocks were "venerable" or something like that. I guess that comes from them reading something called "Transfiguration Today" which sounds to me like a professional journal. If they were generally old, then Ron's comment (an old warlock) is redundant. Whatever they are, they are: *easily recognizable *literate *able to produce offspring for at least 9 generations *employable by the MoM *allowed to hang out in pubs *leaders of federations (probably not of planets) *anything else I have forgotten. Maybe we need a complete list of what we know about them. Ginger, who is trailer trash and has never seen a warlock in the hood. From Vivamus at TaprootTech.com Tue Dec 7 15:55:54 2004 From: Vivamus at TaprootTech.com (Vivamus) Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 10:55:54 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Warlock/Wizard - was Asking JKR just one question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200412071056280.SM01064@devbox> No: HPFGUIDX 119442 > Carol wondered where she had heard Perkins referred to as a warlock: > > > I thought it did, and I know I didn't invent the reference. But it > > just calls him "a stooped, timid-looking old wizard with fluffy > white > > hair" (OoP Am. ed. 134), which at least gives a description of a > > particular warlock, if indeed he is one. The only other reference I > > found is in relation to the tent he lends to Mr. Weasley in GoF for > > the QWC (the one that looks like Mrs. Figg's house inside but > doesn't > > smell like cats). Unfortunately all that one says is that Perkins > > doesn't camp much any more because he has lumbago (GoF 80). The > quote > > I'm looking for, as I remember it, is "Perkins, an old warlock who > > worked in Mr. Weasley's office," but exactly where that > quote occurs > > escapes me at the moment. (Geoff?) > > Ginger: > I'm not Geoff, although I like his posts, but if you both > don't mind... > > In chapter 3 of CoS, Ron, Fred and George pick Harry up to > take him to the Burrow. Harry asks how they knew he was in > trouble. Ron reminds him that Arthur works for the MoM. > Harry asks what he does. > Ron tells him about it and comments "it's only him and an old > warlock called Perkins in the office". (US paperback p. 31) > > I had the idea the warlocks were "venerable" or something like that. > I guess that comes from them reading something called > "Transfiguration Today" which sounds to me like a > professional journal. If they were generally old, then Ron's > comment (an old > warlock) is redundant. > > Whatever they are, they are: > *easily recognizable > *literate > *able to produce offspring for at least 9 generations > *employable by the MoM *allowed to hang out in pubs *leaders > of federations (probably not of planets) *anything else I > have forgotten. > > Maybe we need a complete list of what we know about them. > > Ginger, who is trailer trash and has never seen a warlock in the hood. Vivamus: WARLOCK COMPENDIUM: Here are all the references to the word "warlock" in books 1-5: Headmaster: ALBUS DUMBLEDORE (Order of Merlin, First Class, Grand Sorc., Chf. Warlock, Supreme Mugwump, International Confed. of Wizards) "But it's against our laws," said Ron. "Dragon breeding was outlawed by the Warlocks' Convention of 1709, everyone knows that. " International Confederation of Warlocks' Statute of Secrecy "The teapot went berserk and squirted boiling tea all over the place and one man ended up in the hospital with the sugar tongs clamped to his nose. Dad was going frantic - it's only him and an old warlock called Perkins in the office -and they had to do Memory Charms and all sorts of stuff to cover it up -" Warlock D. J. Prod of Didsbury says: "My wife used to sneer at my feeble charms, but one month into your fabulous Kwikspell course and I succeeded in turning her into a yak! Thank you, Kwikspell!" Professor Binns, glancing up in the middle of a deadly dull lecture on the International Warlock Convention of 1289, looked amazed. "It was a very near miss," said Ernie. "And in case you're getting ideas," he added hastily, "I might tell you that you can trace my family back through nine generations of witches and warlocks and my blood's as pure as anyone's, so -" "My dear boy," said Lockhart, straightening up and frowning at Harry. "Do use your common sense. My books wouldn't have sold half as well if people didn't think Id done all those things. No one wants to read about some ugly old Armenian warlock, even if he did save a village from werewolves. He'd look dreadful on the front cover. No dress sense at all. And the witch who banished the Bandon Banshee had a harelip. I mean, come on -" Fudge has been criticized by some members of the International Federation of Warlocks for informing the Muggle Prime Minister of the crisis. Harry ate breakfast each morning in the Leaky Cauldron, where he liked watching the other guests: funny little witches from the country, up for a day's shopping; venerable-looking wizards arguing over the latest article in Transfiguration Today; wild-looking warlocks; raucous dwarfs; and once, what looked suspiciously like a hag, who ordered a plate of raw liver from behind a thick woollen balaclava. It was extremely crowded, noisy, warm, and smoky. A curvy sort of woman with a pretty face was serving a bunch of rowdy warlock' up at the bar. There was nothing in Madcap Magic for Wacky Warlocks. . . nothing in A Guide to Medieval Sorcery As you have already received an official warning for a previous offence under Section 13 of the International Confederation of Warlocks' Statute of Secrecy, we regret to inform you that your presence is required at a disciplinary hearing at the Ministry of Magic at 9 a.m. on the twelfth of August. They're trying to discredit him,' said Lupin. 'Didn't you see the Daily Prophet last week? They reported that he'd been voted out of the Chairmanship of the International Confederation of Wizards because he's getting old and losing his grip, but it's not true; he was voted out by Ministry wizards after he made a speech announcing Voldemorts return. They've demoted him from Chief Warlock on the Wizengamot - that's the Wizard High Court - and they're talking about taking away his Order of Merlin, First Class, too.' That he did knowingly, deliberately and in full awareness of the illegality of his actions, having received a previous written warning from the Ministry of Magic on a similar charge, produce a Patronus Charm in a Muggle-inhabited area, in the presence of a Muggle, on the second of August at twenty-three minutes past nine, which constitutes an offence under Paragraph C of the Decree for the Reasonable Restriction of Underage Sorcery, 1875, and also under Section 13 of the International Confederation of Warlocks' Statute of Secrecy. 'Rumours abound, of course, that Albus Dumbledore, once Supreme Mugwump of the International Confederation of Wizards and Chief Warlock of the Wizengamot, is no longer up to the task of managing the prestigious school of Hogwarts. The room was scarcely less quiet than the street outside, for many of the patients were making very peculiar noises: a sweaty-faced witch in the centre of the front row, who was fanning herself vigorously with a copy of the Daily Prophet, kept letting off a high-pitched whistle as steam came pouring out of her mouth; a grubby-looking warlock in the corner clanged like a bell every time he moved and, with each clang, his head vibrated horribly so that he had to seize himself by the ears to hold it steady. 'Over here!' called Mrs Weasley above the renewed clanging of the warlock in the corner, and they followed her to the queue in front of a plump blonde witch seated at a desk marked Enquiries. Describe the circumstances that led to the formation of the International Confederation of Wizards and explain why the warlocks of Liechtenstein refused to join. 'Albus Dumbledore, newly reinstated Headmaster of Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry, reinstated member of the International Confederation of Wizards and reinstated Chief Warlock of the Wizengamot, has so far been unavailable for comment.' COMMENTS: 1. Several passages refer to wizards and warlocks in the same area of text, distinguishing between them somehow. They are, apparently, recognizable. The hospital scene with the warlock clanging refers to him twice as a warlock while others around him are referred to as witches or wizards. 2. Since DD is Chief Warlock of the Wizengamut, that seems to imply status beyond that of witch/wizard. 3. context seems to imply (consistent with my memories of tradition) that warlocks are always male. 4. There are references BOTH to the "International Confederation of Warlocks" AND to the "International Confederation of Wizards". Context implies they are the same body. Is this (1) a FLINT, or (2) was one a typo that should have referred to the Wizengamut or the Confederation of Wizards, or (3) are there in fact two different such bodies? 5. The "rowdy" group of warlocks (and the Kwikspell ad) suggests youth more than old age. 6. Looking through all the quotes, I think it is entirely possible that warlock is simply a synonym for wizard, and JKR simply uses it for verbal flow. If not, then it must represent a status differentiation of some kind -- perhaps based on accomplishment. Some additional quotes: "I quite agree, Madame Maxime," said Karkaroff, bowing to her. "I shall be lodging complaints with the Ministry of Magic and the International Confederation of Wizards -" "How are you?" she said, standing up and holding out one of her large, mannish hands to Dumbledore. "I hope you saw my piece over the summer about the International Confederation of Wizards' Conference?" "Level Five, Department of International Magical Co-operation, incorporating the International Magical Trading Standards Body, the International Magical Office of Law and the International Confederation of Wizards, British Seats." 'You don't know my mother, she'd weasel anything out of anyone!' Seamus snapped at him. 'Anyway your parents don't get the Daily Prophet. They don't know our Headmaster's been sacked from the Wizengamot and the International Confederation of Wizards because he's losing his marbles -' Had Dumbledore suffered like this all summer, as first the Wizengamot, then the International Confederation of Wizards had thrown him from their ranks? Was it anger at Harry, perhaps, that had stopped Dumbledore getting in touch with him for months? The two of them were in this together, after all; 'Rumours abound, of course, that Albus Dumbledore, once Supreme Mugwump of the International Confederation of Wizards and Chief Warlock of the Wizengamot, is no longer up to the task of managing the prestigious school of Hogwarts. Vivamus From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Dec 7 16:23:08 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 16:23:08 -0000 Subject: Positive image of James. Was: Re: Snape and Lupin's Character Arcs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119443 > Pippin: > In PoA, it comes up *only* in the context of the Marauder's Map and Harry going outside the school, apparently to meet with Black. Snape isn't allowed to tell Harry that Sirius and Lupin were his father's friends, and know what might lure him out of school. > In Snape's mind, James's arrogance led him to cooperate with these friends in a prank that could have ruined James's life. Later James refused to believe that one of these friends could be a traitor, and it got him killed. Snape *has* to warn Harry, because he sees that Sirius and Lupin could destroy Harry the way they destroyed James. > > > Alla: > > I am sorry, you lost me here. Which Prank could have ruined James life? The one where he saved Snape's? Sirius' Prank? For all we know, it is quite possible that James did not even know about that prank beforehand. < Pippin: Snape believes that James was involved in the very amusing joke that almost ended in his death. That would be the werewolf prank. I don't think James helped plan it. On the other hand, we have Ron and Hermione, both prefects, covering up for the twins about Montague, another prank that got out of hand. I can easily believe that James later found out more about what had happened than he told the authorities. Snape is, in any case, more right than he knows that James was saving himself too. Dumbledore isn't inclined to probe into student mischief too closely when no permanent harm has been done, but if Snape had been bitten, there would have been an investigation. If the story of the illegal animagi and the werewolf excursions into Hogsmeade had come to light, James could have been expelled. Alla: > I also don't follow the part with Snape's warning Harry by talking badly about James about Harry's possible destruction by Sirius and Remus.< Pippin: IIRC, Snape refers to Harry's father twice in PoA. Both times, he is convinced that behaving like James is going to get Harry killed, and he's not allowed to say why. The first time, Harry has just been spotted near the shrieking shack by Malfoy, and he returns to the castle knowing he's going to be in trouble. Snape finds Harry right where he expects to, in the vicinity of the One-eyed Witch. He interrogates Harry, who responds with a string of outrageous lies, suggesting that Malfoy is having hallucinations, for example. Snape has to find out what Harry has really been up to, he has to find out if Sirius had anything to do with it (the fact that Harry was found near the shrieking shack must have looked especially ominous) and most especially he has to make Harry understand that behaving like James is dangerous. Sirius knew James very well and could be using that knowledge to get Harry to come to him. Lupin agrees: "these mapmakers would have tried to lure you out of school." But Snape is not allowed to tell Harry that Sirius was his father's friend. Snape instead tries to tell Harry that he is being arrogant like James, who also disregarded rules whenever he felt like it. You have to wonder if Snape, looking straight into Harry's eyes, isn't hoping Harry will pick up some of what he isn't being allowed to say, just the way Harry was hoping Snape would understand him in Umbridge's office. That's not too far-fetched if Snape knows that Harry gets some of his abilities from Voldemort. The second time, in the shrieking shack, Snape again believes that Harry is in danger from Sirius, and that if Harry trusts Sirius as his father did, he is going to get killed. "You'd have died like your father, too arrogant to believe he might be mistaken in Black." If Snape, as Dumbledore's spy, has better reasons than resenting Sirius to believe that James should have been convinced, Snape can't say what they are. I know it doesn't seem fair that Snape won't hear Sirius and Lupin out, but consider that he thinks he is dealing with dark wizards who were clever enough to fool Dumbledore, who can usually tell when someone is lying to him. Why should Snape believe anything they have to say? Pippin From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Dec 7 16:46:14 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 16:46:14 -0000 Subject: Snape and Lupin's Character Arcs (was: Lupin's Char Arc) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119444 Lupinlore: > No, not moral perfection. I am speaking of the fact that Snape is arrogant, abusive, and hypocritical. If those traits are tolerated in the Wizarding World, that is no excuse. Thus, ignorance of the law, i.e. ignorance of proper behavior and morality, is no excuse. Sorry, Snape is just in the wrong.< Pippin: Yeah, he's a jerk all right. But that's not a crime. It's bad karma, if you believe in that, and he certainly suffers the providential justice of JKR's pen, but if he hasn't figured that out in thirty-five odd years, it's not likely to dawn on him shortly. What I've observed in real life is that some people I thought were jerks with no redeeming qualities turned out to have been doing things all along that immensely benefited other human beings, for no reason more selfish than that they felt the call. That's the sort of discovery I expect Harry to make about Snape, and I don't think it will be at all insipid. But that's just me. Pippin From elsyee_h at yahoo.com Tue Dec 7 16:47:14 2004 From: elsyee_h at yahoo.com (Tammy) Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 16:47:14 -0000 Subject: Hermione and DU (was: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 33 - Fight and Flight) In-Reply-To: <200412070919495.SM01064@devbox> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119445 Tina wrote: > > Man, I just wanted Hermione to shut up! With every word she > > spoke it got worse and worse (kind of like Umbridge...). She > > has the book knowledge but clearly needs to work on her > > understanding of applying some of that knowledge. > > Vivamus replied: > Me too on wanting her to shut up, but isn't it interesting that she *didn't* > shut up? How she did not respect the Centaurs enough to stop what she was > doing and think when they reacted badly? I thought it was almost *exactly* > like Umbridge. I wondered if perhaps JKR isn't making the point that there > isn't as much difference between the "good" and "bad" characters as our > fantasy-trained minds would have us believe. Hermione is far more > intelligent than DU, but made the same stupid blunder (and it was stupid not > in a lack of understanding the Centaurs in the first place, but in not > shutting up and thinking when they reacted badly to the first statement.) > *snip* > In that respect, Hermione and DU are not all that different. The question > for me is whether Hermione is going to learn to let other people make their > own choices. I think she will by the end of the series, but only because I > think JKR really wants Hermione to mature into a healthy adult (well, I do, > too.) But I don't think the encounter with the Centaurs was sufficiently > disastrous enough to get her attention. In her own way, I think she is as > blind as Hagrid is about monsters -- and that may well be JKR's point. > > Vivamus Tammy replies now: I don't think Hermione is like DU. Umbridge is arrogant and self-serving. DU is a racist, plain and simple, which is what leads to her downfall with the centaurs. She expects them to realize they are "lower creatures" and to respect her higher status. Hermione on the other hand, has loads of book knowledge, but little to no interpersonal people skills. She's a standard "nerd" (no offense to any nerds in the group, and please note I'm generalizing for the purpose of my point :P ). She can't interact with people. She has a hard time interacting with Ron and Harry most of the time. I think that while Hermione and DU had basically the same result with centaurs, it was for entirely different reasons. Still a good point from JKR though. -Tammy, who identifies greatly with Hermione's lack of people skills :D From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Tue Dec 7 17:39:18 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 09:39:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Voldermort's "death" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041207173918.48002.qmail@web53109.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119446 > Encouraged by moonmyst's response to one of my previous posts, I am > again going to jump into the fray with my pet theory: I think > somehow Lord Voldemort will have his soul eaten my a dementor. I > think that somehow Harry will trick LV into possesing him, and a > dementor will Kiss Harry, but somehow Harry will retain his soul > and > survive to tell the tale. > > Here are links to my former posts, #119306 and #119223 > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/119306 > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/119223 > > imamommy > who is going to keep bringing this idea up until it gets read a bit > more widely, and I receive more replies because I'm really > interested in getting feedback on it I'm not sure about the possessing-Harry bit but otherwise I agree that getting Dementor-ed is a likely Voldemort ending. It would be poetic justice if his allies turned on him, also that there is a force stronger than Voldemort, and there's got to be a reason why the awfulness and the loyalty of the Dementors is mentioned in the later books. Also in POA Lupin says being Dementor-ed is a fate worse than death, and there's that dialogue about that very subject between Dumbledore and Voldemort at the MoM in OOTP. Foreshadowing? At any rate, it would give the series an out from Harry's supposed fate as either victim or killer. If he can get Voldemort soul-sucked, he won't have to actually kill him. "Neither can live while the other survives..." Works for me. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free! http://my.yahoo.com From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Dec 7 18:08:59 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 18:08:59 -0000 Subject: Hermione and DU (was: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 33 - Fight and Flight) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119447 > > Vivamus replied: > > Me too on wanting her to shut up, but isn't it interesting that she *didn't* shut up? How she did not respect the Centaurs enough to stop what she was doing and think when they reacted badly? I thought it was almost *exactly* like Umbridge. I wondered if perhaps JKR isn't making the point that there isn't as much difference between the "good" and "bad" characters as our fantasy-trained minds would have us believe. Hermione is far more intelligent than DU, but made the same stupid blunder (and it wasstupid not in a lack of understanding the Centaurs in the first place, but in not shutting up and thinking when they reacted badly to the first statement.) > > > *snip* > > > In that respect, Hermione and DU are not all that different. The question for me is whether Hermione is going to learn to let other people make their own choices. I think she will by the end of the series, but only because I think JKR really wants Hermione to mature into a healthy adult(well, I do, too.) But I don't think the encounter with the Centaurs was sufficiently disastrous enough to get her attention. In her own way, I think she is as blind as Hagrid is about monsters -- and that may well be JKR's point. > > Tammy replies now: > > I don't think Hermione is like DU. Umbridge is arrogant and > self-serving. DU is a racist, plain and simple, which is what leads to her downfall with the centaurs. She expects them to realize they are "lower creatures" and to respect her higher status.< Pippin: The Museum of Tolerance in Los Angeles has two entrances. One is a door marked "Prejudiced" -- the other is marked "Non-prejudiced." The Non-prejudiced entrance is permanently sealed. I don't know if that could have inspired JKR's own locked door, but I think Hermione would feel uncomfortable walking through the "Prejudiced" entrance. Of course one point is that one of the things people are not open-minded about is whether they are open-minded. The other is that we all cling to our pre-conceived ideas. It's a survival trait, IMO. Our ancestors wouldn't have lasted long in the jungle if they waited to see whether this particular tiger was dangerous before they reacted. Hagrid's absurd inability to be afraid of monsters is a playful reminder that fear of the abnormal isn't entirely bad. Hermione differs from Umbridge in that she recognizes that prejudice can lead to bad choices. But they are equally the victims of the tendency to cling to pre-conceived ideas.When the House Elves or the Centaurs don't act the way Hermione expects them to, she behaves as if they'd made a mistake, not her. I think the centaurs have a point, actually. Hermione would have been as upset as they were if someone had dealt with a dangerous enemy by leading them toward Harry without so much as asking Harry whether he wanted to help. Pippin From Vivamus at TaprootTech.com Tue Dec 7 18:21:19 2004 From: Vivamus at TaprootTech.com (Vivamus) Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 13:21:19 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Hermione and DU (was: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 33 - Fight and Flight) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200412071321910.SM01064@devbox> No: HPFGUIDX 119448 > Tina wrote: > > > Man, I just wanted Hermione to shut up! With every word > she spoke > > > it got worse and worse (kind of like Umbridge...). She > has the book > > > knowledge but clearly needs to work on her understanding > of applying > > > some of that knowledge. > > > > Vivamus replied: > > Me too on wanting her to shut up, but isn't it interesting that she > *didn't* > > shut up? How she did not respect the Centaurs enough to stop what > she was > > doing and think when they reacted badly? I thought it was almost > *exactly* > > like Umbridge. I wondered if perhaps JKR isn't making the point > that there > > isn't as much difference between the "good" and "bad" > characters as our > > fantasy-trained minds would have us believe. Hermione is far more > > intelligent than DU, but made the same stupid blunder (and it was > stupid not > > in a lack of understanding the Centaurs in the first place, > but in not > > shutting up and thinking when they reacted badly to the first > statement.) > > > *snip* > > > In that respect, Hermione and DU are not all that different. The > question > > for me is whether Hermione is going to learn to let other people > make their > > own choices. I think she will by the end of the series, but only > because I > > think JKR really wants Hermione to mature into a healthy adult > (well, I do, > > too.) But I don't think the encounter with the Centaurs was > sufficiently > > disastrous enough to get her attention. In her own way, I think she > is as > > blind as Hagrid is about monsters -- and that may well be > JKR's point. > > > > Vivamus > > Tammy replies now: > > I don't think Hermione is like DU. Umbridge is arrogant and > self-serving. DU is a racist, plain and simple, which is what > leads to her downfall with the centaurs. She expects them to > realize they are "lower creatures" and to respect her higher status. > > Hermione on the other hand, has loads of book knowledge, but > little to no interpersonal people skills. She's a standard > "nerd" (no offense to any nerds in the group, and please note > I'm generalizing for the purpose of my point :P ). She can't > interact with people. She has a hard time interacting with > Ron and Harry most of the time. > > I think that while Hermione and DU had basically the same > result with centaurs, it was for entirely different reasons. > Still a good point from JKR though. > > -Tammy, who identifies greatly with Hermione's lack of people > skills :D Vivamus: Tammy, you are absolutely right that they are different in all those areas. DU is all of those things, and Hermione is not. But when it comes to respecting other people's boundaries, I think they have a similar blindness. Just as Harry and LV have many similarities, even though they are radically different, so Hermione and DU have similarities. DU stomps on other people because she can, and because she is a sadist, and because she is the epitome of a power-hungry beaurocrat, but she probably didn't start out that way. She probably started out thinking that she was making the world a better place by "helping" people "for their own good", and that is not altogether different from where Hermione is. I'm not suggesting that Hermione would ever grow into a DU or anything remotely like her. Hermione is brave, kind, intelligent, and good, and I don't think DU was ever very much of any of those things, even when she was young. But it is so easy to view the world as black and white that we forget that people are highly complex, and don't easily fall into good/bad categories. Hermione is a wonderful person, but she can be pretty annoying. One of her most annoying traits is that of disrespecting other peoples freedom of choice. It is never said in the books, but it seems clear to me that she is doing this "for their own good." That applies whether she is following Harry around all day, nagging him about a choice that is his (not hers,) or making his potion disappear (earning him a zero) when cleanup is HIS responsibility, not hers, or *arguing* with the house elves (and everyone else) about what the house elves actually *want* in life. All to their own way of looking at the books, but I very much like the fact that the heroes are flawed. They are incredible in some ways, but blind in others, and they do make huge mistakes that have huge consequences. From sylviablundell at aol.com Tue Dec 7 18:30:09 2004 From: sylviablundell at aol.com (ladyramkin2001) Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 18:30:09 -0000 Subject: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 33 - Fight & Flight Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119449 Mari wrote: Grawp reminded me of the Warner Brothers cartoon of the Abominable Snowman: "I want a little bunny rabbit, so I can love and hold. I will call him George" which is a cariacature of a character in Of Mice and Men (which I can't think of the name right now). That would be Lennie. I have taught that book so often I am beginning to think I wrote it. George is the name of Lennie's companion, who protects and cares for him, which is quite funny when you remember the fate of the little bunny rabbits at Lennie's innocent hands. Sorry this is a bit OT but I have been having trouble with Yahoo recently and wanted to see if I could get anything through. Sylvia From caseylane at wideopenwest.com Tue Dec 7 18:58:51 2004 From: caseylane at wideopenwest.com (Casey) Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 18:58:51 -0000 Subject: Is Snape really THAT good in Potions?(was: Snape and the Kappa) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119450 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nkafkafi" wrote: > So Lupin does have a reason to exaggerate a bit about the ability > needed for brewing wolfbane and how helpful Snape is. In fact, > considering how important this potion is in Lupin's life, it would be > strange if he doesn't know how to prepare it himself. So, diabetic's know how to make their own insulin? I should know how to make my Prevacid? Even if I had the materials and written instructions to follow, I don't think I would want to take that risk. Nope, I leave that job to the Snapes of the world. Casey From stonehenge.orders at verizon.net Tue Dec 7 19:34:05 2004 From: stonehenge.orders at verizon.net (kjirstem) Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 19:34:05 -0000 Subject: Int'l Confed. of Warlock/Wizard? Was: Re: Warlock/Wizard ) In-Reply-To: <200412071056280.SM01064@devbox> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119451 > Vivamus: > > WARLOCK COMPENDIUM: > (snipped, see post http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/119442 (Nice listing of use of "warlock" in books 1-5)) > Fudge has been criticized by some members of the International > Federation of Warlocks for informing the Muggle Prime Minister of >the crisis. > COMMENTS: > 4. There are references BOTH to the "International Confederation of > Warlocks" AND to the "International Confederation of Wizards". >Context implies they are the same body. Is this (1) a FLINT, or (2) >was one a typo that should have referred to the Wizengamut or the >Confederation of Wizards, or (3) are there in fact two different such >bodies? kjirstem: Thanks for putting together that list! I think that at least the use of "International Federation of Warlocks" must be a typo/flint; that one quote seems to be the only place it is used. I suppose JKR could always say the Daily Prophet reporter got it wrong since the quote is from a Daily Prophet article. Aside from that, "International Confederation of Warlocks" seems to be used only in conjunction with the Statute of Secrecy. Although, (digression alert!) the situation becomes really mixed up when the Statute of Secrecy is brought in since it may be referred to by other names, or else there is more than one. (Both QA and FBaWTFT refer to an International Statute/Code of Wizarding Secrecy - from an Int'l Confed. of Wizards meeting in 1692. Clause 73 making each country responsible for keeping secrecy within its own borders was added in 1750.(FBaWTF p. xvi)) Maybe JKR can't keep straight what the name is herself. Maybe some editing errors occur. Maybe she uses the acronym ICW and it gets expanded differently. Or maybe we're back to that unreliable narrator. My vote is with confusion somewhere along the line (could be the narrator's) of what ICW means, except in the case of "International Federation of Warlocks". kjirstem - who wants to get her head out of the details but ...(insert reason of your choice) From elsyee_h at yahoo.com Tue Dec 7 20:29:56 2004 From: elsyee_h at yahoo.com (Tammy) Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 20:29:56 -0000 Subject: Hermione and DU (was: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 33 - Fight and Flight) In-Reply-To: <200412071321910.SM01064@devbox> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119452 > > Tammy replies now: > > > > I don't think Hermione is like DU. Umbridge is arrogant and > > self-serving. DU is a racist, plain and simple, which is what > > leads to her downfall with the centaurs. She expects them to > > realize they are "lower creatures" and to respect her higher status. > > > > Hermione on the other hand, has loads of book knowledge, but > > little to no interpersonal people skills. She's a standard > > "nerd" (no offense to any nerds in the group, and please note > > I'm generalizing for the purpose of my point :P ). She can't > > interact with people. She has a hard time interacting with > > Ron and Harry most of the time. > > > > I think that while Hermione and DU had basically the same > > result with centaurs, it was for entirely different reasons. > > Still a good point from JKR though. > > > > Vivamus: > Tammy, you are absolutely right that they are different in all those areas. > DU is all of those things, and Hermione is not. But when it comes to > respecting other people's boundaries, I think they have a similar blindness. > Just as Harry and LV have many similarities, even though they are radically > different, so Hermione and DU have similarities. DU stomps on other people > because she can, and because she is a sadist, and because she is the epitome > of a power-hungry beaurocrat, but she probably didn't start out that way. > She probably started out thinking that she was making the world a better > place by "helping" people "for their own good", and that is not altogether > different from where Hermione is. > > I'm not suggesting that Hermione would ever grow into a DU or anything > remotely like her. Hermione is brave, kind, intelligent, and good, and I > don't think DU was ever very much of any of those things, even when she was > young. But it is so easy to view the world as black and white that we > forget that people are highly complex, and don't easily fall into good/bad > categories. > > Hermione is a wonderful person, but she can be pretty annoying. One of her > most annoying traits is that of disrespecting other peoples freedom of > choice. It is never said in the books, but it seems clear to me that she is > doing this "for their own good." That applies whether she is following > Harry around all day, nagging him about a choice that is his (not hers,) or > making his potion disappear (earning him a zero) when cleanup is HIS > responsibility, not hers, or *arguing* with the house elves (and everyone > else) about what the house elves actually *want* in life. > > All to their own way of looking at the books, but I very much like the fact > that the heroes are flawed. They are incredible in some ways, but blind in > others, and they do make huge mistakes that have huge consequences. Tammy replies: You're definitely right about Hermione. In addition to her bad people skills, she thinks she's right. Just look at her idea of nice gifts (the talking homework planner popped into my head when reading your reply). I really wonder if JKR will eventually have Hermione end up "right" about the house-elves or if she will be forced to give up her mission to free them. I think Hermione's attitude has been too much of a part of the books for it to lead to nothing. -Tammy, who says the heck with book 6, gimme book 7! From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 7 20:33:49 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 20:33:49 -0000 Subject: Voldermort's "death" In-Reply-To: <20041206165745.SM01064@devbox> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119453 > > whimsyflower (wildflower) wrote: > > What if vanquishing does not > > mean killing, but somehow redeeming? or emptying of evil? I > > wonder if somehow Harry forgives LV or sees some good in him, > > and because Harry does so, LV is vanquished or looses his > > power or becomes impotent or is rendered no longer evil? Kim responded: > > By asking the question about vanquishing do you lean in the direction of a Lord Voldemort redemption? If so, I'm with you on that.< Kim now: I still hope to hear Whimsyflower's opinion on this, since she's the one who asked the question... Kim continued: > > I somehow doubt that Harry or anyone else will actually be > > able to "kill" Voldemort, because I don't think he's been > > killable for some time, not even after taking Harry's blood > > in GoF. > Vivamus responded: > You may be right, of course, but I'll toss my hat on the side that DD's "gleam of something like triumph" meant either that LV is now human enough to be killed, or in some way is now vulnerable to being destroyed by Harry, if by no one else.< Kim now: I think you may be right too, as to Harry being the only one who'll be able to "kill" Voldemort, if it turns out that LV is killable (but I insist that that remains to be seen). The way I'd figured that Harry's blood might not have made LV mortal (or more "human") is that H.'s blood already contained its own "immortality" (that's why H. didn't die when LV AK'd him years ago or any time thereafter). So is Harry as mortal as any other human wizard, or is he less mortal? Does his blood in LV's veins make LV more mortal or less mortal? It kind of works like a mathematical equation. I think these are reasonable questions that we don't know the answers to yet. Kim continued: > > I also don't think Harry is actually killable either, not by LV's hand at any rate. I think it would be quite a twist if LV survived the final battles, though it would be much less severe and final a fate for the evil one than some folks might wish for. It even seems likely that Harry's forgiving nature might make him forgive even LV. But I'd still like Harry to "vanquish" LV's evil nature. That's the main point, isn't it -- to stop the evil, not just to get even with LV?< Vivamus responded: > I fear I must disagree here most strongly. The entire series has been about making ethical choices and facing consequences. Always it has been choices that have been emphasized, not fate. Harry & co. will win because they choose to do so, albeit at great cost. Just as LV has remained alive because he has willed to do so, Harry will be able to vanquish him forever despite all odds because Harry's will is equally strong, and his heart is as good as LV's is bad.< Kim now: I don't disagree with your second sentence. But I do disagree with the rest of the paragraph, in the sense that you still ought to try and answer Whimsyflower's original question -- how do you define "vanquish"? Not only that, IMO it would be informative to define the meaning of "win." Besides, wouldn't Harry's choosing *not* to kill Voldemort be a "choice"? It just seems that in your opinion it would be wrong for Harry to make that particular choice. But it'll be Harry's choice to make, not yours or mine... ;-) Ethics are often in the eye of the beholder. I can't say for sure what choice Harry will make, but given his character so far, I'm still nudged in the direction of Harry choosing not to kill. Vivamus continued: > The other side of this coin is that choices always result in consequences. LV has made choices all along the line which are purely evil. Irrespective of how he got to where he is -- and there are probably some significant faults to be laid at others who had a hand in shaping him (Grindelwald, perhaps?) -- he nevertheless has chosen, as an adult, to be who and what he is. If any choices in life have irredeemable consequences, and we are not just chips in a mill race, then LV must die.< Kim responds: I agree again with most of the paragraph, but disgree with the concluding sentence -- it reminds me of that "trick" question about the death penalty: How does killing someone teach people that killing is wrong? But if it's vengeance that's wanted, then sure, LV must die. Vivamus continued: > A good example for comparison is the Star Wars saga. Darth Vader represents a figure who seems purely evil, and acts that way, yet Luke is able to redeem him. This may be what some are bringing to mind, if they are thinking about redeeming LV. But standing behind Darth Vader is the Emperor -- who not only merits death but receives it. In story terms, Luke was able to redeem his father only because there was a still darker figure behind him to take the fall. Even then, Anakin Skywalker could only be redeemed in death. LV does not have any such figure. In allegorical terms, he IS the Emperor; he IS the evil Galactic Overlord; he is the source of the evil that must be vanquished, not a victim of it. Kim now: I think the comparison between Harry Potter and Star Wars only goes so far (and that comparison hadn't occurred to me at any rate). As far as I can tell though, JKR has a somewhat different world view from George Lucas (or maybe it's your interpretation of George Lucas's world view that I would disagree with...). I for one don't see LV as being on the same level as an evil galactic overlord or the source of evil in the Potterverse. Besides, IMO, even if he were, in the real universe as well as the Potterverse, the source of all evil can't be "vanquished" for good and all, unless of course, all or most of humankind is one day returned to the state of promordial goo, as I suggested in a different post. OTOH, you may be right if it turns out that LV no longer *has* a soul to be redeemed... Vivamus continued: >While there probably was some good in young Tom Riddle before he went the way he did, and there almost certainly were others who contributed to Tom's choices, it is Tom, ultimately, who must pay the price for his own choices.< Kim asks: That's true, but then that's also true for everyone. So then what price must those who contributed to Tom's choices pay? Which again begs the question, what *particular* price must be paid by Tom/LV or anyone else? Why in some people's opinions does *death* seem to be the only price? Kim wrote: > Redemption would be a much more effective way of rendering LV powerless for good, and besides, as repayment for his crimes, he might then be made to do some really helpful community service, such as volunteer work in a Muggle orphanage... ;-) ... As to how to render LV powerless and possibly even good, LV could somehow be lured into that mysterious locked room in the Dept. of Mysteries and "neutralized" (that is, if being in there didn't just vaporize him instead...)< Vivamus: > I think a "redeemed" Tom Riddle walking around doing good would be a source of suffering to Neville Longbottom (and hundreds of others who have suffered similarly at the hands of LV or his followers) *almost* as terrible as the loss of his parents in the first place. Kim responds: You may be right -- not leaving out Harry of course, if Harry survives (and I'm with those who think he will survive) and I do see your point that TR/LV still walking around could be a problem for some who suffered at his hands. But can you see the character of Neville or Harry killing anyone, even LV? Delivering LV over to some higher authority to decide on his fate, yes, but Harry and Neville directly killing LV themselves? Which suggests this question: Who or what would that higher authority be? Then again, why do you assume that a "redeemed" Tom Riddle would cause suffering to Neville, et al.? An "unredeemed" Tom Riddle, yes, but a "redeemed" Tom Riddle? Please explain. Vivamus signed off: >Vivamus, who is old-fashioned enough to believe that freedom implies responsibility, and some choices have eternal consequences< Kim: I'm not sure what "old-fashioned" means in this context. I also hope you're not suggesting that I don't believe that freedom implies responsibility or that some choices don't have "eternal" consequences. For the record, I believe those things too. But I see the situation differently apparently. Here's a question: What would be the eternal consequences for those who make the choice *not* to "forgive the trespasses of those who have trespassed against them..."? Kim (who clearly likes to ask questions even though she doesn't know the answers either) From gbannister10 at aol.com Tue Dec 7 20:54:17 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 20:54:17 -0000 Subject: Warlock/Wizard - was Asking JKR just one question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119454 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "quigonginger" wrote: Ginger: > I'm not Geoff, although I like his posts, but if you both don't > mind... Geoff (bowing low and blushing): Thank you (to the first comment). Not at all (to the second). Ginger: > In chapter 3 of CoS, Ron, Fred and George pick Harry up to take him > to the Burrow. Harry asks how they knew he was in trouble. Ron > reminds him that Arthur works for the MoM. Harry asks what he does. > Ron tells him about it and comments "it's only him and an old warlock > called Perkins in the office". (US paperback p. 31) Geoff: Ten points to Gryffindor (asuming that's your house)! I must file that one away for reference. From gbannister10 at aol.com Tue Dec 7 21:02:13 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 21:02:13 -0000 Subject: Warlock/Wizard - was Asking JKR just one question In-Reply-To: <200412071056280.SM01064@devbox> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119455 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Vivamus" wrote: > COMMENTS: > 3. context seems to imply (consistent with my memories of tradition) that > warlocks are always male. > Geoff: Heinemann English Dictionary defines warlock as "a male witch" while Reader's Digest Word Power Dictionary defines the word as "a man who practises witchcraft". Geoff http://www.aspectsofexmoor.com From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 7 21:02:49 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 21:02:49 -0000 Subject: Warlock/Wizard - was Asking JKR just one question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119456 Valky earlier: > > > Does your OOTP call Perkins a Warlock? Mine doesn't. > > Carol earlier: > > I thought it did, and I know I didn't invent the reference. > and so clearly I didn't invent it. > > Valky: > I certainly didn't infer that you did. > > Carol [earlier], hoping someone will help her find that elusive little > quotation. > > Valky: > No need, I am not interested in bickering. > I would rather discuss what a Warlock *may* be, than pick at faults > in others postings. Carol responds: Valky, you misunderstand me. I didn't mean to imply that you were criticizing me or suggesting that I made it up. I only meant to cite the two places I knew Perkins was mentioned and see if someone else could find the one I was referring to and that Lexicon Steve apparently read, too, since he refers to Perkins as an "old warlock" on his site. I just want us to figure out, as a team, what a warlock is, based on our limited information. Apparently that's what you want, too. To reiterate, if Perkins is a warlock, then a warlock *can* be a stooped old man with lumbago and fuzzy white hair--certainly not the *definition* of a warlock, but possibly an example of one--which, as I noted, doesn't fit very well with the "rowdy warlocks" Harry sees at one point, and recognizes as warlocks, but does fit with Ernie Macmillan's warlock ancestors as an indication that warlocks are not necessarily Eastern European. (Perkins sounds plain English to me and Macmillan Scottish or Irish; the Brits on the list will straighten me out on this, I'm sure.) Carol, who also is not interested in bickering and was only chiding herself for being unable to find that quotation From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 7 21:32:42 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 21:32:42 -0000 Subject: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 33 - Fight and Flight In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119457 > > Chapter 33 ? Fight and Flight > > 5. Harry and Ron try to discourage Ginny, Luna and Neville from > joining them to help Sirius in London. Harry thinks, "...if he could have chosen any member of the DA to join him in the attempt to rescue Sirius, he would not have picked Ginny, Neville or Luna." (p. 671) > Why are they so opposed to these specific people? > Carol responds belatedly: As pretty much everyone has pointed out, both Harry and Ron perceive Neville as incompetent, Luna as "Loony," and Ginny as Ron's little sister. I think their participation in the battle at the MoM is the first step toward Harry's recognition that he has underestimated all three, that his perception of them is distorted by preconceptions, oversights, and misinterpretation. We, the readers, are starting to see Neville and Ginny a bit more clearly and I'm sure most readers hope, as I do, that Harry will also start to recognize that both of them truly belong in Gryffindor. Luna is a bit different, as she still seems odd and spacey even to us as readers (partly our limited omniscient narrator again, presenting her to us from Harry's point of view). But clearly there's more to her than meets the eye. She deals patiently with other people's mistreatment of her, she trusts that death is not the end of all things, she calmly tells the group that they're going to fly to the MoM (on Thestrals) and turns out to be right, she, like Harry, hears the voices beyond the veil. It may be Hermione, rather than Harry, whose preconceptions about Loony Luna are changed in HBP when some "fact" that she has read in a book is disproved and Luna's intuition is proven correct (cruple-horned snorkacks, anyone)? At any rate, that's what I think this scene is about. Harry's group of trusted associates will slowly expand as he comes to realize that even though he's "the one with the power," he will need allies to fight this war. And the first step in gaining new allies is to come as close as possible to seeing people as they really are and understanding and appreciating what each one has to offer (which of course applies to Snape as well as his three unwanted companions on the MoM expedition). Carol From steve51445 at adelphia.net Tue Dec 7 21:45:26 2004 From: steve51445 at adelphia.net (Steve) Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 16:45:26 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Warlock/Wizard - was Asking JKR just one question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041207214519.YTDE8465.mta10.adelphia.net@steveupstairs> No: HPFGUIDX 119458 Ginger wrote: In chapter 3 of CoS, Ron, Fred and George pick Harry up to take him to the Burrow. Harry asks how they knew he was in trouble. Ron reminds him that Arthur works for the MoM. Harry asks what he does. Ron tells him about it and comments "it's only him and an old warlock called Perkins in the office". (US paperback p. 31) A different Steve here: I wonder if this Perkins is the same one Prof. Binns refers to in OotP, chapter 17 when Hedwig shows up at the window after being attacked? Harry says that he is not feeling well and should go to the hospital wing. Binns says, "...well, off you go then, Perkins." Steve, Who listens to his HP audio books while sleeping. Talk about weird dreams! From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 7 21:53:56 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 21:53:56 -0000 Subject: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 33 - Fight and Flight In-Reply-To: <200412070919495.SM01064@devbox> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119459 Vivamus wrote: Hermione is far more intelligent than DU, but made the same stupid blunder (and it was stupid not in a lack of understanding the Centaurs in the first place, but in not shutting up and thinking when they reacted badly to the first statement.) > > To me, it shows that even the brightest and best have to tread carefully at times, and even the best of intentions can cause bad things to happen, if actions are not done with respect for others. Remember how much trouble she caused Harry by minding his business and doing his moral thinking for him? Remember her deleting his potion? Here is an example of Hermione, once again, showing the same disrespect for other persons' free choices, and potentially causings some very serious consequences. > She has a huge blind spot when it comes to other > people's freedom -- the house elves are a perfect example of that. She knows what is "best" for them and they do not. She is going to give it to them even if it gets everyone killed in a WW race war. In her own way, I think she is as blind as Hagrid is about monsters -- and that may well be JKR's point. Carol responds: While I still think that the centaurs are as "racist" in their way as any wizard in the WW and demonstrated the mob or *herd* mentality in their overreaction to Hermione and Umbridge, I also think that Vivamus has a valid point here. Hermione is like many intelligent and idealistic young people (she is just fifteen and really doesn't understand how very young that is despite hoping that the centaurs would consider her a "foal"). She thinks she knows exactly what's wrong with the world and exactly how to fix it and doesn't understand why everyone else doesn't immediately see the light of reason when she explains it to them. So she doesn't see that she has blundered in her first encounter with the centaurs (whose goodness and rationality she has overestimated, IMO) and continues with the same tactic, convinced that she is right and that if she speaks long enough, she'll convince them of her rightness. As Vivamus says, she's knows what's "best" and they don't, just as she knows what's "best" for the house-elves, whose feelings don't matter because, in her view, they've been deluded by wizards and can no longer think for themselves. We've discussed Harry's "hero complex" (and Snape's as well). Can it be that Hermione also has a "saving people" thing, a desire to fix what's wrong with the world (as she sees it) and make it right (by her standards)? Strange if all her idealistic thinking and Harry's gut reaction to make things right by taking action have led them both in the same wrong direction! A little growing up would help them both, but they don't have time to acquire wisdom through life experience in the normal fashion by Book 7. Carol, who once upon a time had all the answers, too, but has long since grown disillusioned From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 7 22:36:09 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 22:36:09 -0000 Subject: Voldemort's "death" In-Reply-To: <20041207173918.48002.qmail@web53109.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119460 iamamommy wrote: I think somehow Lord Voldemort will have his soul eaten my a dementor. I think that somehow Harry will trick LV into possesing him, and a dementor will Kiss Harry, but somehow Harry will retain his soul and survive to tell the tale. > > Magda responded: > I'm not sure about the possessing-Harry bit but otherwise I agree > that getting Dementor-ed is a likely Voldemort ending. It would be > poetic justice if his allies turned on him, also that there is a > force stronger than Voldemort, Also in POA Lupin says being Dementor-ed is a fate worse than death, and there's that dialogue about that very subject between Dumbledore and Voldemort at the MoM in OOTP. Foreshadowing? > > At any rate, it would give the series an out from Harry's supposed > fate as either victim or killer. If he can get Voldemort > soul-sucked, he won't have to actually kill him. Carol adds: I also would like to see Harry have an "out" so that he destroys Voldemort without having to "murder" him (his own word) and the Dementors might provide a way to do that (without, I hope, having Harry kissed by a Dementor in the process). The main problem I see with this theory is that Harry is "the one with the power" and his defeat of Voldemort is supposed to involve his unique ability to master the mysterious power behind the door (sacrificial love?). I don't want to see him sacrifice himself to a Dementor to achieve this goal even if he does live to tell the tale. But it strikes me that my objection is more a matter of personal revulsion than logic. I do think we are intended to see the Dementor's soul-sucking as a fate worse than death. Barty Jr's body may still be walking around in St. Mungo's, he may even still be eating and drinking, but he no longer has a self or a soul and when his soulless body dies, that will be the absolute end of him--no passing beyond the Veil, no reunion with the mother who loved him and died for him, no chance for redemption for the truly horrible things he did in life through his own tragic wrong choices. His soul, separated from his body, is lost in darkness and nothingness forever. While there can be no question that Voldemort deserves that unthinkably terrible fate even more than Barty, whom he corrupted and ruined, there's also the question of what death is, what would happen to Voldemort if he were to die (and if he can die in the normal way). What is death in JKR's potterverse? Would Voldemort, perhaps the most evil wizard of all time and certainly one of the worst, have a chance for redemption? Or would he pay for his sins in the WW equivalent of hell? We have no indication that the WW has any such concept, unless you count vestiges of Christianity such as Christmas carols and Harry's baptism and the occasional use of "damn" and "hell" as mild curse words (Snape's "I don't give a damn about that wretched poltergiest!" and Ron's repeated "bloody hell!" if that's not movie contamination). My question is, which would be worse for Voldemort (and consequently more deserved), a soul forever lost in the abyss of darkness inside a Dementor or eternal hellfire (or whatever equivalent punishment awaits evil wizards after death)? If death (for wizards) is not something to be feared, if it's just the "next great journey" and Sir Nicholas and the Fat Friar were wrong to fear it, then surely death is too good for Voldemort? And if, as Hagrid suggests, Voldemort no longer has enough human left in him to die (even with Harry's blood inside him), what then? Maybe some different fate awaits him. Maybe earthly immortality, once ended, destroys the chance for an eternal life beyond the Veil. If so, maybe Voldemort doesn't need a Dementor to fall into the nothingness that awaits him. Carol, wondering if earthly immortality precludes eternal afterlife for wizards From MadameSSnape at aol.com Tue Dec 7 22:39:28 2004 From: MadameSSnape at aol.com (MadameSSnape at aol.com) Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 17:39:28 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Warlock/Wizard - was Asking JKR just one question Message-ID: <64.49e4c15e.2ee78b20@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119461 In a message dated 12/7/2004 1:14:09 AM Eastern Standard Time, Aisbelmon at hotmail.com writes: Valky: Does your OOTP call Perkins a Warlock? Mine doesn't. --------------- Sherrie here: Actually, the reference is in GoF - someone tells Harry that the Misuse of Muggle Artifacts office consists of Mr. Weasley and "an old warlock". (IIRC, it's at the QWC, but as I don't have the book to hand, I won't swear to that. It's in the pre-Hogwarts section, anyway.) Sherrie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From MadameSSnape at aol.com Tue Dec 7 22:40:42 2004 From: MadameSSnape at aol.com (MadameSSnape at aol.com) Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 17:40:42 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Warlock/Wizard - was Asking JKR just one question Message-ID: <105.55c12db4.2ee78b6a@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119462 In a message dated 12/7/2004 1:14:09 AM Eastern Standard Time, Aisbelmon at hotmail.com writes: The Wizengamot always conjured, for me personally, an image of a FreeMasons Club. An exclusive group of Gentleman wizards who are the powers behind the thrones as is the myth of the FreeMason. ========== Sherrie here: And then in OotP we find that it's basically the wizarding version of Supreme Court and Parliament, all rolled up in one...a bit too respectable for "punk", methinketh. Sherrie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 7 23:00:43 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 23:00:43 -0000 Subject: Hermione and DU (was: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 33 - Fight and Flight) In-Reply-To: <200412071321910.SM01064@devbox> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119463 Vivamus wrote: > Just as Harry and LV have many similarities, even though they are radically different, so Hermione and DU have similarities. DU stomps on other people because she can, and because she is a sadist, and because she is the epitome of a power-hungry beaurocrat, but she probably didn't start out that way. She probably started out thinking that she was making the world a better place by "helping" people "for their own good", and that is not altogether different from where Hermione is. Carol responds: Umbridge's position as High Inquisitor has always reminded me of Tolstoy's (or should I say Ivan Karamazov's) imaginary Grand Inquisitor even though the Grand Inquisitor has at least some admirable qualities. But like both Umbridge and Hermione, he thinks he knows wha'ts best for people. The Grand Inquisitor wants the people to remain ignorant and happy and is willing to commit murder to keep them that way. Similarly, Umbridge, wants to simplify the students' lives by having them study theory instead of practical magic, not having Snape teach them potions that are too difficult for them, etc. She wants to make them "happy" by taking away their fear of Voldemort and is willing to sadistically punish any student who dares to contradict her official "truth" with "lies." Does anyone else think this is a deliberate parallel on JKR's part, or am I just imagining similarities based on the similarity between "High Inquisitor" and "Grand Inquisitor"? In any case, Umbridge's high-handed idea of "helping" students through indoctrination and punishing "false" ideas is certainly worse than Hermione's desire to "help" those who don't share her version of the truth, but the assumption of both that they possess a truth to be imposed on others is, IMO, more than a bit scary. Hermione won't turn into an Umbridge, I hope, but she does seem to share the Grand Inquisitor's view that "happiness" (as they define it) can and should be imposed on those who "need" it. Carol, again just throwing out ideas in the hope of thoughtful reactions From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 7 22:36:28 2004 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 22:36:28 -0000 Subject: Snape and Lupin's Character Arcs (was: Lupin's Char Arc) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119464 > Lupinlore: No, not moral perfection. I am speaking of the fact that Snape is arrogant, abusive, and hypocritical. [snipped here] Sorry, Snape is just in the wrong.< > Pippin: Yeah, he's a jerk all right. But that's not a crime. It's bad karma, if you believe in that, and he certainly suffers the providential justice of JKR's pen, but if he hasn't figured that out in thirty- five odd years, it's not likely to dawn on him shortly.< Betsy: I would come down somewhere in the middle here and say that Snape's behavior when it comes to Harry *is* immature and arrogant, but that's what I love about the character. Yes, his behavior towards Harry is wrong (too cruel and often uncalled for), but damn entertaining and in the end, very humanizing. Here's this ostensibly dignified and intelligent man, totally loosing it over an eleven year old. Immediately, he's more interesting than MM. First you think he's the big evil, but then you realize that he's actually a good guy *and* the major "save- Harry's-butt" guy. For me it adds so much depth to the character of Snape to realize that his dislike of Harry is based on an old school rivalry. It gives him a layer of passion and intensity. And where MM stays pretty firmly in the realm of "dignified teacher," Snape is brought down to the level of human being. Eventually, I'd love to see Snape finally let go of his old school hurts. Just as I'd love Lupin to get over his need to please (or at least need to not-annoy). In a way, I think Snape and Lupin could be intertwined on this particular journey. Betsy, who's new and taking a deep breath and jumping right in. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 7 23:31:33 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 23:31:33 -0000 Subject: Snape and McGonagall Re: Snape and Lupin's Character Arcs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119465 > Betsy: I would come down somewhere in the middle here and say that Snape's behavior when it comes to Harry *is* immature and arrogant, but that's what I love about the character. Yes, his behavior towards Harry is wrong (too cruel and often uncalled for), but damn entertaining and in the end, very humanizing. Here's this ostensibly dignified and intelligent man, totally loosing it over an eleven year old. Immediately, he's more interesting than MM. First you think he's the big evil, but then you realize that he's actually a good guy *and* the major "save- Harry's-butt" guy. For me it adds so much depth to the character of Snape to realize that his dislike of Harry is based on an old school rivalry. It gives him a layer of passion and intensity. And where MM stays pretty firmly in the realm of "dignified teacher," Snape is brought down to the level of human being. Eventually, I'd love to see Snape finally let go of his old school hurts. Just as I'd love Lupin to get over his need to please (or at least need to not-annoy). In a way, I think Snape and Lupin could be intertwined on this particular journey. > Betsy, who's new and taking a deep breath and jumping right in. Alla: Hi, Betsy! Welcome. I definitely agree with you on some points. Snape's behaviour towards Harry IS entertaining sometimes, but to me it provokes dualistic reaction - I find his remarks incredibly funny sometimes, but I am also disgusted at them. As I said many times - story without Snape wil lose half of its appeal, IMO, but at the same time, I reserve my right to bash him as much as I want to for his sadistic behaviour. As to Snape being more interesting than McGonagall? I am not sure. After OOP, McGonagall at least is just interesting to me as Snape is. "Good teacher" can be fun character, IMO and to me , McGonagall definitely is. I adored her rebukes of Umbridge, I hated her "Get a grip" to Harry. In short, I think McGonagall is VERY human. Maybe she is a little bit better human being than Snape is (just my opinion of course), but definitely very human. About Snape being a good guy and major "save Harry", I will just say I have to wait and see about this one. I am definitely in agreement with you that I want Snape to let go of his old grudges, not just be excused for some reasons that he cannot change or something like that. From lea_petra at myway.com Tue Dec 7 23:02:52 2004 From: lea_petra at myway.com (mari) Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 18:02:52 -0500 (EST) Subject: Of Grawp and Lennie (was CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 33 - Fight & Flight) Message-ID: <20041207230252.582E912CE6@mprdmxin.myway.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119466 Mari wrote: >Grawp reminded me of the Warner Brothers cartoon of the Abominable >Snowman: "I want a little bunny rabbit, so I can love and hold. I >will call him George" which is a cariacature of a character in Of Mice >and Men (which I can't think of the name right now). Sylvia wrote: >That would be Lennie. I have taught that book so often I am beginning >to think I wrote it. George is the name of Lennie's companion, who >protects and cares for him, which is quite funny when you remember the >fate of the little bunny rabbits at Lennie's innocent hands. Mari: OT My husband was surprise I forgot, since in college he played Curly in A production Of Mice and Men Anyway, Rereading the passages when Hagrid is talking about his brother. I noticed the same correlation between Hagrid and Grawp and George and Lennie. Hopefully the same fate will not happen to Grawp as what happen to Lennie. Mari From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Wed Dec 8 00:35:38 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 00:35:38 -0000 Subject: Warlock/Wizard - was Asking JKR just one question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119467 > > Valky: > > > The word Warlock is said to be derived from Old English for Oath Breaker. ... It means traitor. > > > > Geoff: > > Just adding a couple of odds and ends to the thread.... > > > > According to the Concise Oxford Dictionary, warlock is and archaic word for sorcerer or wizard (covers Dumbeldore?). It is derived from Old English "waerloga" = deceiver which includes the root "waer" truth and is cognate with Latin "verus" = true and "loga" = liar. which seems a little contradictory. Truth liar? why not just plain liar?> > > bboyminn: > > While it can certainly be helpful, and many time is, I think we need to be careful about putting too much stock in word origins. We can find many words in the English language whose modern common usage > don't fit their ancient origins. > Valky: This is very true, and as a matter of fact the word Warlock is a prime example. This word is used to convey so many varied meanings in current english that the origin seems to be lost. bboy: >snip< > Someone suggested it was similar to Freemasons, and that could be, but why would Freemason be typified as wild, rowdy, and raucous. Not shooting down just the Freemason idea specifically, just trying to show that, so far, none of the ideas I've heard, including my own, quite fit the bill. > Valky: I suggested Freemasons or distinctive social clubs, is it my post you are referring to? In any case I agree that rowdy and raucous don't seem appropriate adjectives unless these particular Warlocks (as a distinguished Club) were having a celebration that qualified such this behaviour. (Again as always I want my POA back, I am going out to get a spare copy today. I have had enough of missing it!) bboy: > That's why I think it would be a good question to ask JKR, especially if it were in a situation where she wasn't rushed to answer as many questions as possible as in the on-line chats. > > Also, there are some fantastic question we would all like to ask, bu what are the chance that they would actually be answered. The > 'Warlock' question is one that I think has a chance of being answered. > I agree, there is a good chance that JKR would give a full answer to this one. Amen, that you get to ask her it. Valky From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 8 00:13:07 2004 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 00:13:07 -0000 Subject: Snape and McGonagall (was Snape and Lupin's Character Arcs) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119468 > Alla: As to Snape being more interesting than McGonagall? I am not sure. After OOP, McGonagall at least is just interesting to me as Snape is. "Good teacher" can be fun character, IMO and to me , McGonagall definitely is. I adored her rebukes of Umbridge, I hated her "Get a grip" to Harry. In short, I think McGonagall is VERY human. Maybe she is a little bit better human being than Snape is (just my opinion of course), but definitely very human.< Betsy: Oh yes, McGonagall is an interesting character, and I adored every scene between her and Umbridge. I don't want to take anything away from her. The way I see Snape, however, is almost like more of a school boy himself. Here's a teacher who is set up as almost an equal of McGonagall (scary and difficult and really good at his subject), but he's so willing to get down in the dirt with Harry, practically looking for a reason to tussle with the boy (verbally of course), that he looses all dignity he'd gained. I cannot see McGonagall allowing a child to ruffle her feathers like that, no matter who their parents are. And it's that very childishness that makes Snape so... interesting is probably the wrong word... compelling maybe? Snape has some growing to do whereas McGonagall is definitely a grownup. Alla again: > About Snape being a good guy and major "save Harry", I will just say I have to wait and see about this one.< Betsy again: I was thinking specifically about PS/SS here, where we learn that he's not just following Harry around to get some dirt on him, but is attempting to keep Harry safe. And in OOP where Snape does actually try to help Harry save Sirius instead of just dismissing Harry's cry for help. I hope that in the end, Snape will be seen as overall a good guy, but I make no attempt at predicting what JKR will further reveal about him. She likes her surprises, that Jo. *g* Betsy From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Wed Dec 8 01:00:24 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 01:00:24 -0000 Subject: Warlock/Wizard - was Asking JKR just one question In-Reply-To: <105.55c12db4.2ee78b6a@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119469 Valky: > The Wizengamot always conjured, for me personally, an image of a > FreeMasons Club. An exclusive group of Gentleman wizards who are the powers behind the thrones as is the myth of the FreeMason. > ========== > Sherrie said: And then in OotP we find that it's basically the wizarding version of Supreme Court and Parliament, all rolled up in one...a bit too respectable for "punk", methinketh. and Finwitch said: Hmm.. 'Chief Warlock of the Wizengamot' doesn't sound like warlock would mean outcast or slabby or any such thing. Not when linked to something like the Wizengamot Valky replies: It is true I suggested punk gang and then later freemasons, but I didn't mean them to be confused, they are separate and unrelated hypotheticals for the meaning of Warlock. From cunning_spirit at yahoo.com Wed Dec 8 01:22:44 2004 From: cunning_spirit at yahoo.com (cunning_spirit) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 01:22:44 -0000 Subject: Questions About Centaur Culture In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119470 To All: I've been enjoying the current chapter discussions unfolding here. The points comparing parallels and differences between Delores Umbridge and Hermoine's interactions with the centaurs has been fascinating. Which brings up some questions for me about the centaurs themselves. Is it just me, or do most of the centaurs sound like a bunch of religious dogmatics to any of you? For that matter, why is it that while we have seen a herd of fifty centaurs (which FBAWTFT says is the general upper limit for herd size), and gotten to know the names of about a half dozen of the members, we have as yet seen no female centaurs. Do they live in some sort of culturally imposed seclusion, or purdah? While classical mythology has only male centaurs within its corpus, if Walt Disney can propose female centaurs, surely Rowling can too. Where are the foals for that matter? Harry and the other Hogwarts students who venture into the Forest are compared to foals, so one would assume there must also be centaur children somewhere. I have to be honest, but the prickly xenophobia on both sides of the dialogue between DU and the centaurs has reminded me a lot of levels of gauche arrogance and blind assumptions that have been the hallmarks of the current American administration's dealings with non-Western societies. From bob.oliver at cox.net Wed Dec 8 01:24:28 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 01:24:28 -0000 Subject: Snape and McGonagall Re: Snape and Lupin's Character Arcs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119471 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" > I definitely agree with you on some points. Snape's behaviour towards > Harry IS entertaining sometimes, but to me it provokes dualistic > reaction - I find his remarks incredibly funny sometimes, but I am > also disgusted at them. Yeah, and this is a difference I have with the majority of HP readers. I've simply never understood why people find Snape or his remarks funny. They're clever, I suppose, but they've always struck me as rather pathetic -- not to mention boring. I mean, the man's SUCH a one-note. The other characters reveal a wide array of emotional reactions, whereas Snape can only manage bitter, angry, and nasty, no matter what the situation. BOOOOOORING. > I am definitely in agreement with you that I want Snape to let go of > his old grudges, not just be excused for some reasons that he cannot > change or something like that. I just don't know. I'm inclined to side with Pippin on this that after thirty-five years or so Snape's unlikely to see the light. Which is the main reason I think he's probably slated for the morgue in the great scheme of things. Lupinlore From bob.oliver at cox.net Wed Dec 8 01:32:09 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 01:32:09 -0000 Subject: Snape and Lupin's Character Arcs (was: Lupin's Char Arc) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119472 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > > Yeah, he's a jerk all right. But that's not a crime. It's bad karma, > if you believe in that, Well, bad karma is a crime in a very real sense -- a crime against moral law. But we are just quibbling over terms. I agree that Snape has accumulated a load of bad karma, and I'm anxious to see it discharged. One way is for him to do something spectacularly good (something he has already done just doesn't cut the mustard in a literary sense). The other is for him to suffer the effects in a "karmic payback" to use Alla's phrase. Public humliliation and ridicule would be most appropriate, but there are also other apt punishments. Personally, as I have said before, I don't think Snape has it in him to do something good enough to discharge the "bad karma" he's accumulated through his cruelty to Harry. Therefore I tend to think he will die in the end. And I'll just have to disagree with you on the insipidity issue. It's purely my opinion of course, but I do think leaving Snape unpunished for his cruelty in some sort of "well, I didn't realize you were risking/doing so much so I see you in a different light" ending would be the height of insipid conclusions. Lupinlore From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 8 02:14:23 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 02:14:23 -0000 Subject: Snape and McGonagall Re: Snape and Lupin's Character Arcs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119473 Alla wrote previously: I definitely agree with you on some points. Snape's behaviour towards Harry IS entertaining sometimes, but to me it provokes dualistic reaction - I find his remarks incredibly funny sometimes, but I am also disgusted at them. Lupinlore: Yeah, and this is a difference I have with the majority of HP readers. I've simply never understood why people find Snape or his remarks funny. They're clever, I suppose, but they've always struck me as rather pathetic -- not to mention boring. I mean, the man's SUCH a one-note. The other characters reveal a wide array of emotional reactions, whereas Snape can only manage bitter, angry, and nasty, no matter what the situation. BOOOOOORING. Alla: Well, absolutely, after OOP Snape's hatred IS rather one note. But yes, I at least smiled when I read "your head is not allowed in Hogsmead" or "he is standing right there" when Ron and Harry arrive in school in CoS. But that is why I crave so much some character development on Snape's part. I want him to learn to let go. Yes, of course our main character development happens wehn we are very young, but it does not mean that we cannot change at 35 or 36, especially if we consider the fact that wisard's life span is longer than your average muggle. Lupinlore: I just don't know. I'm inclined to side with Pippin on this that after thirty-five years or so Snape's unlikely to see the light. Which is the main reason I think he's probably slated for the morgue in the great scheme of things. Alla: I do suspect that you are right, but again I can dream, can't I? :o) From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 8 02:18:02 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 02:18:02 -0000 Subject: Snape and Lupin's Character Arcs (was: Lupin's Char Arc) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119474 Lupinlore: Personally, as I have said before, I don't think Snape has it in him to do something good enough to discharge the "bad karma" he's accumulated through his cruelty to Harry. Therefore I tend to think he will die in the end. Alla: I think him dying is very possible, but what about Pettigrew? I seriously think that either Snape OR pettigrew will die for Harry, not both of them. Whom do you choose? :o) Lupinlore: > And I'll just have to disagree with you on the insipidity issue. > It's purely my opinion of course, but I do think leaving Snape > unpunished for his cruelty in some sort of "well, I didn't realize > you were risking/doing so much so I see you in a different light" > ending would be the height of insipid conclusions. Alla: Yes, but I will keep hope till the end of book 7 that Snape may see the light. :) If not than yes, carmic payback for him and Harry NEVER sending his kids to Hogwarts. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 8 02:27:08 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 02:27:08 -0000 Subject: Positive image of James. Was: Re: Snape and Lupin's Character Arcs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119475 > Pippin: snip. But Snape is not allowed to tell Harry that Sirius was his father's friend. Snape instead tries to tell Harry that he is being arrogant like James, who also disregarded rules whenever he felt like it. You have to wonder if Snape, looking straight into Harry's eyes, isn't hoping Harry will pick up some of what he isn't being allowed to say, just the way Harry was hoping Snape would understand him in Umbridge's office. That's not too far-fetched if Snape knows that Harry gets some of his abilities from Voldemort. Alla: Pippin, thank you so much. :) I especially want to thank you for being patient and always willing to clarify your arguments for me. :o) I follow you now, I think (Correct me if I don't) You basically argue Protector!Snape right, who hides good intentions under sadistic words, Ummm, it all comes down to what is going on in Snape's head, I suppose. You could be right or I could be right. We'll never know till series end. But you see, even if Snape has good intentions it does not excuse him, I consider verbal sadism to be pretty big sin. From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 8 02:27:07 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 02:27:07 -0000 Subject: Voldemort's "death" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119476 > iamamommy wrote: > I think somehow Lord Voldemort will have his soul eaten my a > dementor. I think that somehow Harry will trick LV into possesing > him, and a dementor will Kiss Harry, but somehow Harry will retain his soul and survive to tell the tale. >Magda responded: > > I'm not sure about the possessing-Harry bit but otherwise I agree > > that getting Dementor-ed is a likely Voldemort ending. It would be poetic justice if his allies turned on him, also that there is a > > force stronger than Voldemort Also in POA Lupin says being Dementor-ed is a fate worse than death, and there's that dialogue about that very subject between Dumbledore and Voldemort at the MoM in OOTP. Foreshadowing? > At any rate, it would give the series an out from Harry's supposed fate as either victim or killer. If he can get Voldemort soul-sucked, he won't have to actually kill him. Kim responds now: I too think the idea of a Dementor's soul-eating kiss sealing Voldemort's fate is a possibility. It's not the fate I'd prefer, of course, but I still have an open mind as to other possible endings to the series. I think Magda may be right about those "fate worse than death" passages being foreshadowings of LV's fate. But I suggested in a previous post in this thread and will offer the question again: do you think it's possible that LV doesn't even have a soul anymore, as Carol suggests below about Barty Jr.? If LV has already forsaken his own soul, a Dementor's kiss wouldn't have much effect, would it? Besides, the Dementors are on LV's side now (supposedly), so what would cause them to turn on him? Frankly I've never understood who or what the Dementors actually are, other than that I think JKR said that they are the embodiment of depression (or despair?). > Carol added: > I also would like to see Harry have an "out" so that he destroys > Voldemort without having to "murder" him (his own word) and the > Dementors might provide a way to do that (without, I hope, having > Harry kissed by a Dementor in the process). The main problem I see > with this theory is that Harry is "the one with the power" and his > defeat of Voldemort is supposed to involve his unique ability to > master the mysterious power behind the door (sacrificial love?). Kim asks Carol: Is that last part from Harry's conversation with DD in OotP where DD mentions the locked room in the Dept. of Mysteries? My sense is that the power behind the locked door is even greater than sacrificial love, at least if I remember correctly the description DD used. But I too think that mysterious power will play a key role in the ultimate "defeat" of Voldemort. Carol continued: >I don't want to see him sacrifice himself to a Dementor to achieve this goal even if he does live to tell the tale. But it strikes me that my objection is more a matter of personal revulsion than logic.< Kim now: I agree with Carol. A Dementor's kiss for Harry, no way. There can be a kind of natural logic in revulsion and other "physico-emotional" reactions, IMO. I think our bodies are far smarter than we tend to give them credit for. Carol continued: > I do think we are intended to see the Dementor's soul-sucking as a > fate worse than death. Barty Jr's body may still be walking around in St. Mungo's, he may even still be eating and drinking, but he no > longer has a self or a soul and when his soulless body dies, that will be the absolute end of him--no passing beyond the Veil, no reunion with the mother who loved him and died for him, no chance for > redemption for the truly horrible things he did in life through his > own tragic wrong choices. His soul, separated from his body, is lost > in darkness and nothingness forever.< Kim asks: Did the Dementors perform the "kiss" on Barty Jr.? If so, I can't recall it. Not that I remember everything I read. Or I might be inferring something incorrectly from what you wrote. Carol: > ... there's also the question of what death is, what would happen to Voldemort if he were to die (and if he can die in the normal way). What is death in JKR's potterverse? Would Voldemort, perhaps the most evil wizard of all time and certainly one of the worst, have a chance for redemption? Or would he pay for his sins in the WW equivalent of hell? We have no indication that the WW has any such concept, unless you count vestiges of Christianity such as Christmas carols and Harry's baptism and the occasional use of "damn" and "hell" My question is, which would be worse for Voldemort (and consequently more deserved), a soul forever lost in the abyss of darkness inside a Dementor or eternal hellfire (or whatever equivalent punishment awaits evil wizards after death)? If death (for wizards) is not something to be feared, if it's just the "next great journey" then surely death is too good for Voldemort? > > And if, as Hagrid suggests, Voldemort no longer has enough human left in him to die (even with Harry's blood inside him), what then? Maybe some different fate awaits him. Maybe earthly immortality, once ended, destroys the chance for an eternal life beyond the Veil. If so, maybe Voldemort doesn't need a Dementor to fall into the nothingness that awaits him. > > Carol, wondering if earthly immortality precludes eternal afterlife > for wizards Kim: Where does a person go when he dies in the Potterverse? I too doubt it would be either a Christian heaven or hell, but that's just a hunch. Is there anything more specific about that in canon? Perhaps it's something like reincarnation as suggested by "the next great adventure" (note "next," not "last"). But as to LV's chance for redemption, I'm not sure why most people on this list seem to be so dead-set against it. Sure, he deserves his come-uppance, but why is he so totally unredeemable? Of course, he's evil, maybe even the "most evil," but why unredeemable? I wouldn't wish eternal nothingness on anyone, not even LV (and I don't think Harry would either -- also just a hunch). And Harry of all people would seem to have the most justification to wish such a thing for Voldemort. I'm afraid evil figures like LV may just end up being scapegoats sometimes, to be punished eternally for the collective guilt of man- or wizard-kind. I mean, where would LV (and Hitler, Stalin, to name a few from the real world) be without his collaborators, not to mention all those who turn a blind eye to the evil in their midst? What fate do they deserve? Now here's a really crazy question... What if LV were to fall into that time-reversing bell jar in the Dept. of Mysteries and become a baby again (not just a baby-head like that DE did)? Would he still be worthy of eternal damnation then? Kim From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 8 02:33:44 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 02:33:44 -0000 Subject: Is Snape really THAT good in Potions?(was: Snape and the Kappa) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119477 Neri previously: So Lupin does have a reason to exaggerate a bit about the ability needed for brewing wolfbane and how helpful Snape is. In fact, considering how important this potion is in Lupin's life, it would be strange if he doesn't know how to prepare it himself. Casey: So, diabetic's know how to make their own insulin? I should know how to make my Prevacid? Even if I had the materials and written instructions to follow, I don't think I would want to take that risk. Nope, I leave that job to the Snapes of the world. Alla: I don't think the analogy with Muggle medicine is quite applicable. Not every muggle takes pharmacology course, in fact only those who wish to become pharmacists. EVERY wizard takes Potion course in school , so theoretically all of them have to be able to brew some potions. And even though I am pretty well familiar with Prevacid myself, if I knew that Snapes of the world were making it, I would ask my doctor to switch me to another medicine. :o) I am just kidding of course. From javalorum at yahoo.ca Wed Dec 8 02:32:32 2004 From: javalorum at yahoo.ca (javalorum) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 02:32:32 -0000 Subject: Snape and McGonagall Re: Snape and Lupin's Character Arcs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119478 > > Betsy: > For me it adds so much depth to the character of > Snape to realize that his dislike of Harry is based on > an old school rivalry. It gives him a layer of passion > and intensity. And where MM stays pretty firmly in the > realm of "dignified teacher," Snape is brought down to > the level of human being. > Eventually, I'd love to see Snape finally let go of his > old school hurts. Just as I'd love Lupin to get over his > need to please (or at least need to not-annoy). In a way, > I think Snape and Lupin could be intertwined on this > particular journey. > Alla: > > I am definitely in agreement with you that I want Snape to > let go of his old grudges, not just be excused for some > reasons that he cannot change or something like that. Hello, I joined the group only recently so I hope this doesn't sound too blunt, or too familiar if this topic was already discussed way too many times before. With regards to the older group, Snape and Sirius especially, they seem to be involved in their school days a lot more than normal people. I can sort of understand Sirius, considering he was sent to prison not long after he left school. But still, bring up "back in the good ol' days, me and James ..." and is kind of ... hmm, sad. I know James was his best friend at school and all, but it just seems he got nothing else to remember besides school days. And, even though he was sent away shortly after graduation, that was probably still a good 4, 5 years inbetween. For a kid that age, with that much good looks and charisma, I would imagine his life after school (and James being so involved with Lily) was only going to be more exciting, and more memorable. But then, maybe he just didn't talk to Harry about that, and the book was more from Harry's point of view. But for Snape to hang onto his school days like that is very hard to understand. It's not like he enjoyed it. A lot of things must have happened after he left school, growing up, seeing the real world. He wasn't sent to prison. Yet he's still only focused on age 11-17. Maybe he's just that narrow-minded and mean, and he only focuses on bad things happened to him. I would imagine a person like that, going into the real world, can only find a lot worse memories than school days. However, his worst memory was when he was 15, and his worst enemy, after 20+ years, is still James Potter. I think Snape is quite eccentric and entertaining too, but because of this, sometimes I think he exists in the HP universe just for Harry (teaching him life lessons, in both good ways and bad), and not so much of a real character. I hope this doesn't sound too harsh. I really like the book series, but was somewhat disappointed by the last installment (still couldn't help but reading it a few times though). Thanks for your attention, Java From Vivamus at TaprootTech.com Wed Dec 8 05:00:10 2004 From: Vivamus at TaprootTech.com (Vivamus) Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 00:00:10 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Voldermort's "death" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200412080000224.SM01064@devbox> No: HPFGUIDX 119479 > Kim continued: > > > I also don't think Harry is actually killable either, not by LV's > hand at any rate. I think it would be quite a twist if LV > survived the final battles, though it would be much less > severe and final a fate for the evil one than some folks > might wish for. It even seems likely that Harry's forgiving > nature might make him forgive even LV. > But I'd still like Harry to "vanquish" LV's evil nature. > That's the main point, isn't it -- to stop the evil, not just > to get even with LV?< > > Vivamus responded: > > I fear I must disagree here most strongly. The entire series has > been about making ethical choices and facing consequences. Always > it has been choices that have been emphasized, not fate. Harry & co. > will win because they choose to do so, albeit at great cost. > Just as LV has remained alive because he has willed to do so, > Harry will be able to vanquish him forever despite all odds > because Harry's will is equally strong, and his heart is as > good as LV's is bad.< > > Kim now: > I don't disagree with your second sentence. But I do > disagree with the rest of the paragraph, in the sense that > you still ought to try and answer Whimsyflower's original > question -- how do you define "vanquish"? Vivamus: I think of it as a complete defeat, such that no rising again would be possible. If Harry doesn't kill LV outright, LV will nevertheless be utterly destroyed, so that the WW can relax and know that THAT menace, at least, is gone forever. Anything less and the series isn't over. > Not only that, IMO > it would be informative to define the meaning of "win." > Besides, wouldn't Harry's choosing > *not* to kill Voldemort be a "choice"? It just seems that in > your opinion it would be wrong for Harry to make that > particular choice. > But it'll be Harry's choice to make, not yours or mine... ;-) > Ethics are often in the eye of the beholder. I can't say > for sure what choice Harry will make, but given his character > so far, I'm still > nudged in the direction of Harry choosing not to kill. Vivamus: Perhaps this is the essence of the disagreement, in which case we will have to agree to disagree. I do not think ethics are either situational or in the eye of the beholder. If a sociopath believes it is ethical to kill every third left-handed person, that does not make it ethical to do so. Many people believe that the end justifies the means, and there are no absolute rules of right and wrong, and it is perfectly acceptable to do anything you please to anyone you want, as long as you get what you want. My understanding of ethics is strongly deontological, and it truly shocks me to see how conveniently some can arrange their "ethics" to their advantage. I could be mistaken, of course, but my impression of JKR's writing is that the ethics underlying her books are also deontological -- i.e., that there are universal rules, and violating them has great and long-lasting consequences. As to Harry's choice to kill LV or not to kill -- yes, he can choose not to kill. Unless it was JKR's intent to show us that pacifism defeats evil, however, that will mean that LV will win, Harry will die, and everything we've come to love about the WW will be killed or destroyed. From my understanding of ethics, that would be a convenient choice for Harry to make, but an unethical one. > Vivamus continued: > > The other side of this coin is that choices always result in > consequences. LV has made choices all along the line which > are purely evil. Irrespective of how he got to where he is > -- and there are probably some significant faults to be laid > at others who had a hand in shaping him (Grindelwald, > perhaps?) -- he nevertheless has chosen, as an adult, to be > who and what he is. If any choices in life have irredeemable > consequences, and we are not just chips in a mill race, then > LV must die.< > > Kim responds: > I agree again with most of the paragraph, but disgree with > the concluding sentence -- it reminds me of that "trick" > question about the death penalty: How does killing someone > teach people that killing is wrong? But if it's vengeance > that's wanted, then sure, LV must die. Vivamus: Actually, it is not about either vengeance or punishment. It's about consequences. Tom Riddle's consequences for his choices, to be specific. You make a decision, you face a consequence. It might be good or bad, and it might come from your parents when you are young, your coworkers, your boss, or just the normal flow of life, but actions have consequences. Granted, in real life, bad guys often do win, but JKR is writing a set of children's fantasies, and I think she is going to stick with the ideas that good triumphs over evil, and evil actions and decisions create evil consequences. > Vivamus continued: > > A good example for comparison is the Star Wars saga. Darth Vader > represents a figure who seems purely evil, and acts that way, > yet Luke is able to redeem him. This may be what some are > bringing to > mind, if they are thinking about redeeming LV. But standing behind > Darth Vader is the Emperor -- who not only merits death but receives > it. In story terms, Luke was able to redeem his father only because > there was a still darker figure behind him to take the fall. > Even then, Anakin Skywalker could only be redeemed in death. > LV does not have any such figure. In allegorical terms, he > IS the Emperor; he IS the evil Galactic Overlord; he is the > source of the evil that must be vanquished, not a victim of it. > > Kim now: > I think the comparison between Harry Potter and Star Wars > only goes so far (and that comparison hadn't occurred to me > at any rate). As far as I can tell though, JKR has a > somewhat different world view from George Lucas (or maybe > it's your interpretation of George Lucas's world view that I > would disagree with...). I for one don't see LV as being on > the same level as an evil galactic overlord or the source of > evil in the Potterverse. Besides, IMO, even if he were, in > the real universe as well as the Potterverse, the source of > all evil can't be "vanquished" for good and all, unless of > course, all or most of humankind is one day returned to the > state of promordial goo, as I suggested in a different post. > OTOH, you may be right if it turns out that LV no longer > *has* a soul to be redeemed... I agree that the analogy doesn't take you very far, as the worlds are quite different. In literary terms, however, there is a fair amount of similarity. JKR is an incredibly gifted writer, but even she cannot willy nilly make the books make no sense -- she would never have published book 2 if that were the case. The point I was so poorly making was that in the Star Wars *story*, a character that seemed purely evil was redeemed as he died, but that was only possible in a literary sense because another character was portrayed as the source of the evil. In the Potterverse, LV is the source of all the evil that Harry & co. have to face. I'm sure there are other evil forces, many of them, but this story is about Harry and LV. In literary terms, I don't think the story will have an ending satisfactory to anyone if LV lives. I also think both that Harry is quite "killable", and that LV still has a human soul, but we'll have to see what JKR does on that one. > Vivamus continued: > >While there probably was some good in young Tom Riddle before he > went the way he did, and there almost certainly were others > who contributed to Tom's choices, it is Tom, ultimately, who > must pay the price for his own choices.< > > Kim asks: > That's true, but then that's also true for everyone. So then > what price must those who contributed to Tom's choices pay? > Which again begs the question, what *particular* price must > be paid by Tom/LV or anyone else? Why in some people's > opinions does *death* seem to be the only price? I'm afraid the last question is the only one to which I have an answer. Western civilization thinks in those terms because Christian theology holds that all sin is deserving of death -- which is the entire point of the sacrifice on the cross. As to the particular price that is appropriate for anyone in particular to pay, I am not by any means qualified to judge that. Even speaking of LV, I was talking in literary terms, rather than in the real world -- although, to be honest, anyone behaving that way in the real world is worthy of the death penalty, IMO. What happens to LV's soul and whether it is redeemable is not my primary concern; I would simply be a lot more concerned about more Lilys and James and Longbottoms and all the rest, and so I would want him off my planet before he destroys any more good people. > Kim wrote: > > Redemption would be a much more effective way of rendering > LV powerless for good, and besides, as repayment for his > crimes, he might then be made to do some really helpful > community service, such as volunteer work in a Muggle > orphanage... ;-) ... As to how to render LV powerless and > possibly even good, LV could somehow be lured into > that mysterious locked room in the Dept. of Mysteries and > "neutralized" (that is, if being in there didn't just > vaporize him instead...)< > > Vivamus: > > I think a "redeemed" Tom Riddle walking around doing good would be > a source of suffering to Neville Longbottom (and hundreds of > others who have suffered similarly at the hands of LV or his > followers) > *almost* as terrible as the loss of his parents in the first place. > > Kim responds: > You may be right -- not leaving out Harry of course, if Harry > survives (and I'm with those who think he will survive) and I > do see your point that TR/LV still walking around could be a > problem for some who suffered at his hands. But can you see > the character of Neville or Harry killing anyone, even LV? > Delivering LV over to some higher authority to decide on his > fate, yes, but Harry and Neville directly killing LV > themselves? Which suggests this question: Who or what would > that higher authority be? Then again, why do you assume that > a "redeemed" Tom Riddle would cause suffering to Neville, et > al.? An "unredeemed" Tom Riddle, yes, but a "redeemed" Tom > Riddle? Please explain. Vivamus: Actually, I can see Neville lopping off LV's head with a sword (or blasting it off with a Reducto curse) and sleeping soundly at night. He has had to live with the living hell his parents have been in for a very long time, and he has seen what the DEs are like first-hand. He was taunted by Bellatrix, who he knows did that to his parents, and very much wants to do it to him as well. Neville has steel in him, and it would not be a merciful act to avoid killing Bellatrix, so she can choose to do that to another. If he has the chance, I believe Neville will do the right thing and blast her. I don't know if Harry is there yet or not, but I think he may get there by the 7th book. There is a quote from one of the Tom Clancy books that comes to mind: Killing people doesn't bring nightmares, if the people you kill are evil. That strikes me as overly simple, but war only requires one side to fight, not two, and there can be no question that they are in a war. If they are squeamish about killing, they had best grow up quickly and get over it, or they will lose. If Harry kills LV, it would not be murder even if he shot him in the back after careful planning (though he probably *would* be tormented by nightmares if he did that.) The problem with a "redeemed" Tom Riddle is three-fold. In the first place, you would never know if he actually had changed permanently, or if he would someday (perhaps with DE help) throw it off and return to his old ways, causing still more death and suffering. In the second place, redemption implies being bought back. If someone is doing the paying to bring Tom back, who is paying and what are they paying that would be powerful enough to do that? In the third place, those who have suffered do have a genuine need for vengeance. The lack of it can be as bad as the original hurt. I'm not talking about obsession with revenge, but the normal, healthy human instinct to see that those who attack you and those you love are brought down. Put yourself in Neville's shoes. Imagine living your entire life with your parents tormented into insanity. Heros, both of them, but you have to be raised by your grandmother because they do not even know who you are. The ones who tortured them are alive and free, laughing at you about them, and you know they want to do the same to you, as well as to others who are innocent. Now they have been caught, and put through some kind of process that supposedly makes them "redeemed". They are now walking around freely, and supposedly have nothing to do with the wrongs they did. Your parents, however, are still insane. Your suffering (and that of your parents) will never end in this life. How can that be redeemed? "Tell me where all past years are," said Donne. The redemption of which you speak cannot be found, unless Neville's parents are restored to health, and James and Lily brought back from the dead, and all their other victims restored. So Neville's living hell continues, but is now compounded by the fact that he must now give up all hope of taking out his normal, healthy rage on those who created the suffering. That is what I mean when I speak of some actions being beyond redemption. Even if LV were to go through a personal redemption, the consequences would remain, and cannot be undone. > Vivamus signed off: > >Vivamus, who is old-fashioned enough to believe that freedom implies > responsibility, and some choices have eternal consequences< > > Kim: > I'm not sure what "old-fashioned" means in this context. I also hope > you're not suggesting that I don't believe that freedom implies > responsibility or that some choices don't have "eternal" > consequences. For the record, I believe those things too. But I see > the situation differently apparently. Here's a question: What would > be the eternal consequences for those who make the choice *not* > to "forgive the trespasses of those who have trespassed against > them..."? > > Kim (who clearly likes to ask questions even though she doesn't know > the answers either) Vivamus: Actually, I have no idea what you believe, other than what you put in the post to which I was responding. I wasn't implying anything about anyone but myself. Many people today seem to think that moral absolutes are absolutely wrong (curious contradiction, isn't it?), and that we can have freedom without responsibility, much like bouncing a ball without a floor -- but I was drawing a conclusion on the general worldview of society today. As to unforgiveness, I think I'd better leave that topic for a different discussion group, but the rest of the verse you quoted says it pretty well. From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Wed Dec 8 02:43:53 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 18:43:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: Snape and Lupin's Character Arcs (was: Lupin's Char Arc) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041208024353.71926.qmail@web53107.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119480 > Pippin wrote: > > Yeah, he's a jerk all right. But that's not a > > crime. It's bad karma, if you believe in that, > Lupinlore answered: > I agree that Snape has accumulated a load of bad > karma, and I'm anxious to see it discharged. One > way is for him to do something spectacularly good > (something he has already done just doesn't cut > the mustard in a literary sense). The other is for > him to suffer the effects in a "karmic payback" to > use Alla's phrase. Public humliliation and ridicule > would be most appropriate, but there are also other > apt punishments. Juli now: Bad karma for what? For not treating a kid like a hero? Or for not taking all his lies? I don't think it's bad karma, I even think Snape hasn't been that bad towards Harry, Harry just sees it, he thinks it's all about him and that everyone's actions are because of him. > Personally, as I have said before, I don't think > Snape has it in him to do something good enough to > discharge the "bad karma" he's accumulated through > his cruelty to Harry. Therefore I tend to think > he will die in the end. Juli: I don't think Snape will die, there just isn't any surprise in that, If Snape's got bad karma it's because of what he did as a DE, but he's been working for the good side for about 15 years now, I'd say bad karma is all gone. > It's purely my opinion of course, but I do think > leaving Snape unpunished for his cruelty in some sort > of "well, I didn't realize you were risking/doing so > much so I see you in a different light" ending would > be the height of insipid conclusions. But is it really cruel what he's done? He hasn't really done much but to tell Harry the truth and try to protect him. Juli From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Wed Dec 8 03:05:30 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 19:05:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: Voldemort's "death" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041208030530.85809.qmail@web53101.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119481 > > iamamommy wrote: > > I think somehow Lord Voldemort will have > > his soul eaten my a dementor. I think that > > somehow Harry will trick LV into possesing him, > > and a dementor will Kiss Harry, but somehow > > Harry will retain his soul and survive to tell > > the tale. > Magda responded: > Also in POA Lupin says being Dementor-ed is > a fate worse than death, and there's that dialogue > about that very subject between Dumbledore and > Voldemort at the MoM in OOTP. Foreshadowing? > Kim responded: > I too think the idea of a Dementor's soul-eating > kiss sealing Voldemort's fate is a possibility. Do > you think it's possible that LV doesn't even have a > soul anymore? Juli now: I was just thinking, can you imagine LV's patronus? What could it possibly be? Could he even cast one, I mean has he ever been truly happy, not just Jajajaj happy but happy happy, like when you see a friend that you haven't seen in a ling time, or like when you fall in love? Now answering to the posts: If Harry somehow makes LV possess him, and he's kissed by a dementor, wouldn't he also take Harry's soul? Besides, LV can't possess Harry because of his 'power'. So no I don't believe this is how LV will finally die. It can't be in a duel either because we already know what happens when their wands fight each other (priori incantem), so my guess is it'll be something completely different, something we'll never seen before. LV not having a soul? How could it be? AFAIK he still thinks and makes evil plans and everything, if he didn't had a soul at all he would just be a machine, just 'surviving' not living in every sense of the word, enjoying life and being conscious of it. By the way, where is Barty Jr? Is there like an island or something for the soul-less? Juli From khinterberg at yahoo.com Wed Dec 8 06:03:49 2004 From: khinterberg at yahoo.com (khinterberg) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 06:03:49 -0000 Subject: To vanquish Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119482 In light of all the recent posts about the nature of what "vanquish" actually means, I decided to look it up. van?quish Audio pronunciation of "vanquish" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (vngkwsh, vn-) tr.v. van?quished, van?quish?ing, van?quish?es 1. 1. To defeat or conquer in battle; subjugate. 2. To defeat in a contest, conflict, or competition. 2. To overcome or subdue (an emotion, for example); suppress: "She had had to wrench herself forcibly away from Katharine, and every step vanquished her desire" (Virginia Woolf). See Synonyms at defeat. [Middle English vaynquisshen, from Old French vainquir, vainquiss-, from Latin vincere. See weik-3 in Indo-European Roots.] v : come out better in a competition, race, or conflict; "Agassi beat Becker in the tennis championship"; "We beat the competition"; "Harvard defeated Yale in the last football game" [syn: beat, beat out, crush, shell, trounce] \Van"quish\, v. t. [imp. & p. p. Vanquished; p. pr. & vb. n. Vanquishing.] [OE. venquishen, venquissen, venkisen,F. vaincre, pret. vainquis, OF. veintre, pret. venqui, venquis (cf. an OF. infin. vainquir), fr. L. vincere; akin to AS. w[=i]g war, battle, w[=i]gant a warrior, w[=i]gan to fight, Icel. v[=i]g battle, Goth. weihan to fight, contend. Cf. Convince, Evict, Invincible, Victor.] 1. To conquer, overcome, or subdue in battle, as an enemy. --Hakluyt. They . . . Vanquished the rebels in all encounters. --Clarendon. 2. Hence, to defeat in any contest; to get the better of; to put down; to refute. This bold assertion has been fully vanquished in a late reply to the Bishop of Meaux's treatise. --Atterbury. For e'en though vanquished, he could argue still. --Goldsmith. Syn: To conquer; surmount; overcome; confute; silence. See Conquer. So on I went to the synonyms, searching for more information. de?feat Audio pronunciation of "defeat" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (d-ft) tr.v. de?feat?ed, de?feat?ing, de?feats 1. To win victory over; beat. 2. To prevent the success of; thwart: Internal strife defeats the purpose of teamwork. 3. Law. To make void; annul. snipped from synonyms of defeat: Synonyms: defeat, conquer, vanquish, beat, rout, subdue, subjugate, overcome These verbs mean to triumph over an adversary. Defeat is the most general. Vanquish emphasizes total mastery: Napoleon's forces were vanquished at Waterloo. 3. To overcome or vanquish, as an army; to check, disperse, or ruin by victory; to overthrow. So after all this, it can be concluded that death does not need to be involved in the act of vanquishing, but that Harry would need to completely prevent Voldemort from reaching his goals. I'm sure many of you have looked this up before, just thought it might be nice to have around. khinterberg, who, upon looking up vanquish, found than an alternate definition is a disease of sheep in which they "pine away", and is now picturing Voldemort as a fluffy white sheep looking thoroughly dejected From sevenhundredandthirteen at yahoo.com Wed Dec 8 06:20:09 2004 From: sevenhundredandthirteen at yahoo.com (sevenhundredandthirteen) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 06:20:09 -0000 Subject: Voldemort's "death" and redemption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119483 Vivamus wrote: <<<>>> Kim responded: <<<>>> Laurasia replies: The question is: do people ever fully accept that a leopard can change its spots? Voldemort has done some incredibly nasty things in his life, could people affected by these things ever accept that he has repented for them. Or would they refuse to believe it possible, and wish eternal suffering on him as a way of easing their own suffering? Will the knowledge that Voldemort is alive and living out a normal life torment them even more? EVEN IF the guy is genuinely redeemed? EVEN IF Voldemort is as harmless as a flobberworm? EVEN IF the guy is donating them all his families money and doing volunteer work cleaning out bed pans at St Mungo's and working on a magical cure to cancer? Vivamus: <<<>>> I disagree. I see three ways to stop Voldemort re-offending: rehabilitation, fear of punishment and isolation. If Voldemort is sealed in a jar, he can't hurt anyone. If he knows that he will die (his greatest fear) he won't do it. If he genuinely believes that hurting people is wrong, he won't do it. But, like you suggest Vivamus, most readers predict Voldemort's death. Most readers cannot see any way to prevent Voldemort re-offending other than his own death. This, IMO, is a reflection of our own real- world view that `a leopard cannot change its spots' and also because there are only a few stories in the genre where seriously evil people get saved. Vadar, after all, is nothing compared to Emperor Palpatine. JKR has indicated how she feels on the matter by her treatment of other similar scenarios. Severus Snape, after all, got his second chance. And Sirius was portrayed as wrong for not giving it to him. In every single book we are presented with the idea "Did Snape really change his spots?" Usually with Ron saying, `Where's the proof?' and Hermione replying, `We need to trust him, Dumbledore does.' When Voldemort `greets' his Death Eaters in the graveyard he demands 13 years of repayment before accepting that they no longer need punishment for their crimes against their master- something to the tune of `I can't give you a second chance until you're proven beyond absolutely all doubt that you repent against the wrongdoings you committed against me.' Harry, it would seem, would not be ready at the current time to give Voldemort a second chance. He can't even give Snape a second chance, and Snape, as far as Harry knows, hasn't killed anyone, let alone his parents. The question also takes into account- what is the best way to repair the damage control caused by Voldemort? Do his victims was healing, or do they think they can never be fully healed and their only justice will be to watch Voldemort suffer even more than they are? Harry, it would seem, falls into the second category. He tries to perform the Cruciatus Curse on Bellatrix Lestrange, after all. He is so angry in OotP, IMO, because he is trying to make himself suffer for Cedric's death. I think it would be a profound learning experience for Harry to overcome this belief. I think it would truly make Harry stand apart from the common folk if he could accept that Voldemort was no longer dangerous- instead of `watching in case he falls back into his old ways' if Harry could actually put some faith in the guy and didn't ask him to prove that he was "really" good. It is slightly different to forgiveness. Forgiveness takes into account actions past, whilst this takes into account actions future. At the very least, I think such an understanding must eventually some between Harry and Snape. Currently JKR has shown us that we should give people second chances (though Harry doesn't yet feel that way about Snape nor anyone else) and that the best way to repair damage isn't by making other people suffer (although Harry still wants people, including himself, to suffer). I expect we will see him go on a character journey that leads to his own beliefs being consistent with the way they are otherwise presented in the story. I think that if Voldemort is to be truly redeemed then the common folk in the wizarding world won't be asked to accept him as harmless, only Harry. The reason I believe this is because I see it as too difficult a task for JKR to get millions of people to forgive a man who has destroyed their lives. Asking one man, Harry, to do this is difficult enough. And it would set Harry apart from the throngs. He would be a true hero. Perhaps the rest of the wizarding world would think that Voldemort is dead, but Harry would know that he is really just the guy who now does volunteer work at St Mungo's. Or, if anyone is out there looking for a BANG!, maybe Voldemort is redeemed, put into the bell jar, shrunk to being a baby, and then put back in time and lives out his life as none other than: Harry Potter! Ta da! ~<(Laurasia)>~ Who doesn't actually believe that Voldemort will be redeemed. He is going to DIE! From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 8 06:38:11 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 06:38:11 -0000 Subject: Voldemort's "death" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119484 Carol earlier: > > I also would like to see Harry have an "out" so that he destroys> Voldemort without having to "murder" him (his own word) and the Dementors might provide a way to do that (without, I hope, having > Harry kissed by a Dementor in the process). The main problem I see with this theory is that Harry is "the one with the power" and his defeat of Voldemort is supposed to involve his unique ability to master the mysterious power behind the door (sacrificial love?). > > Kim asks Carol: > Is that last part from Harry's conversation with DD in OotP where DD mentions the locked room in the Dept. of Mysteries? My sense is that the power behind the locked door is even greater than sacrificial love, at least if I remember correctly the description DD used. But I too think that mysterious power will play a key role in the ultimate "defeat" of Voldemort. Carol responds: Yes. It seems to be a general consensus that the power behind the locked door and the force that saved Harry from being possessed by Voldemort are the same thing (although I remember a recent argument about a distinction between the two that I confess to not reading carefully enough to paraphrase). At any rate, sacrificial love seems like the likeliest candidate of the forces or powers that have been proposed so far though I don't see Harry as being any more loving than a lot of other people. Altruism might come closer, but that certainly isn't what motivated Harry when he wanted to die and be with Sirius rather than be possessed by Voldemort. Willingness to die, maybe? I don't mind that hypothesis as long as it doesn't result in his *actual* death. But nothing has been resolved by JKR, much less agreed upon by the members of this list. > Carol earlier: > > I do think we are intended to see the Dementor's soul-sucking as a fate worse than death. Barty Jr's body may still be walking around in St. Mungo's, he may even still be eating and drinking, but he no longer has a self or a soul and when his soulless body dies, that will be the absolute end of him--no passing beyond the Veil, no reunion with the mother who loved him and died for him, no chance for redemption for the truly horrible things he did in life through his own tragic wrong choices. His soul, separated from his body, is lost in darkness and nothingness forever.< > > Kim asks: > Did the Dementors perform the "kiss" on Barty Jr.? If so, I can't > recall it. Not that I remember everything I read. Or I might be > inferring something incorrectly from what you wrote. > Carol responds: Yes. Fudge, in a less than stellar moment, brings in the Dementor as "protection" and it descends on the bound Barty Jr. while McGonagall, who was supposed to have been guarding him, watches in helpless horror: "'The moment that--that thing entered the room,' she screamed, pointing at Fudge and trembling all over, 'it swooped down on Crouch and--and--' "Harry felt a chill in his stomach. . . . He knew what the Dementor must have done. It had administered its fatal kiss to Barty Crouch. It had sucked his soul out through his mouth. He was worse than dead" (GoF Am. ed. 705). Whether Fudge is ESE! or merely stupid, he has deprived the WW of a witness to the return of Voldemort. But more to the point, Barty Jr. is now a soulless body. What that means, whether he's like a zombie or eats and drinks and sleeps but has no memories or human feelings, I can't say. I'm guessing that he's in St. Mungo's, but it doesn't really matter where his body is. His soul is inside a Dementor, gone forever, dissolved into nothingness. At least that's how I understand it. And that, to me, seems like an appropriate fate for Voldemort, but only if it can be arranged without Harry having to be a Dementor's victim himself. Carol From gbannister10 at aol.com Wed Dec 8 07:49:16 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 07:49:16 -0000 Subject: Warlock/Wizard - was Asking JKR just one question In-Reply-To: <64.49e4c15e.2ee78b20@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119485 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, MadameSSnape at a... wrote: Sherrie: > Actually, the reference is in GoF - someone tells Harry that the Misuse of > Muggle Artifacts office consists of Mr. Weasley and "an old warlock". (IIRC, > it's at the QWC, but as I don't have the book to hand, I won't swear to that. > It's in the pre-Hogwarts section, anyway.) Geoff: Ginger actually gave us the correct lead in message 109441. It's in COS. En route to the Burrow in the Ford Anglia after rescuing Harry, Ron is speaking about Arthur's work.... "The teapot went beserk and squirted boiling tea all over the place and one man ended up in hospital with the sugar tongs clamped to his nose. Dad was going frantic, it's only him and an old warlock called Perkins in the office and they had to do Memory Charms and all sorts to cover up...." (COS "The Burrow" p.29 UK edition) From finwitch at yahoo.com Wed Dec 8 07:52:18 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 07:52:18 -0000 Subject: Warlock/Wizard - was Asking JKR just one question In-Reply-To: <200412071056280.SM01064@devbox> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119486 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Vivamus" wrote: > COMMENTS: > 4. There are references BOTH to the "International Confederation of > Warlocks" AND to the "International Confederation of Wizards". Context > implies they are the same body. Is this (1) a FLINT, or (2) was one a typo > that should have referred to the Wizengamut or the Confederation of Wizards, > or (3) are there in fact two different such bodies? Finwitch: Nice list - what comes ICoW, well - I'd say that it was Warlocks at first (as History and official note implies) - but they changed the name to Wizards' later. (possibly when the first witch joined in? Or some notification of gender equality was given out? After all, the word wizard has been used for both genders by Albus Dumbledore. (referring to Harry and Hermione). Then again, there is that 'witch and wizard'- business... tricky, but oh well - I suppose the language has changed somewhat... Hmm-mm. Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry. You know, if Wizardry was nothing but another name for witchcraft, why differentiate? Maybe witchcraft refers to the wandless things they do - Herbology, Potions, Care for Magical Creatures, flying with broomsticks, using magical objects other than the wand - and wizardry is what they do with a wand. Or maybe it's that magical power or skill goes - Muggle, Squib, witch/warlock, wizard. After all, the word 'wizard' also refers to high skill (particularly in computing, also there are those graph- creating wizards and installation wizards...). Finwitch From eloiseherisson at aol.com Wed Dec 8 08:36:26 2004 From: eloiseherisson at aol.com (eloise_herisson) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 08:36:26 -0000 Subject: The Philospher's Stone (was: Harry's Protection (was Re: Questions)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119487 Nadine: > >Am I the only one to be bothered by the fact that Nicolas Flamel > > (and his wife) postponed their deaths by six hundred years and > > nobody complains while it seems a terrible crime for Voldemort to > > have tried to achieve immortality ? He is an evil lord, a cruel > >assassin, an outlaw, but why is his work on immortality so > >reprehensible ? Kneasy: >The Flamels - yes. I can't help but feel that they're important >somehow. We still haven't had confirmation that they're actually >dead. I did once suggest that DD was Nicholas Flamel's partner and >had much more to do with the Stone than being its guardian - he > might even have used it. >But really I don't think that Voldy grasping for immortality is so >terrible in itself - it's just what he'd do with his life if he >was unkillable. Eloise (chiming in late): I hadn't thought about this until you two mentioned it, but yes, there are some interesting questions raised here about the Philosopher's Stone. The search for the Philosopher's Stone was not the same as the search for the Holy Grail (another object thought to grant eternity) in that the Grail was/is an unique object, whereas the search for the Philosopher's Stone was the search for a *formula*. This being the case and Flamel having found the formula, it doesn't seem to have been shared, it has remained a secret. At the very least it doesn't seem to be accessible to anyone else as we haven't heard of anyone else making use of it. Likewise, there appears to have been only *one* Philosopher's stone in existence. Granted, Flamel only needed one for his personal use, but was he unable to repeat the experiment to make more? If the search for immortality is so universal (it certainly seems to have been in the days of the alchemists) then surely it was something to be shared? If there were just one Philosopher's Stone and one wizard in command of its secret (plus possibly Dumbledore and any other partners he had previously) then surely both Flamel and the Stone itself should have been the target of every power-mad/immortality-seeking wizard for centuries. Surely the Stone would have had to have been kept closely guarded even before Voldemort needed it for his resurrection? So why the sudden move to Gringotts? Are we really to believe it wasn't in danger before? In fact, why did Voldemort go through all those dangerous, disfiguring experiments in his own search for immortality when the answer, in the form of the Philosopher's Stone and the Elixir of Life was there all the time? Are we really to believe that Voldemort, pre his downfall wasn't powerful enough to have gained control of the Stone then? Did he really have to wait until he was himself powerless in order to try to win it? Something doesn't add up there. There are two ways I can see to explain the anomaly. One is the boring one: the Philospher's Stone plays kind of a central role in PS/SS and if account were taken of all my objections, then there wouldn't really be a plot. The other is that the kind of immortality being offered is different, though what that means, I'm not sure. Voldemort seems to be working towards making himself innately immortal, rather than dependent on an elixir but I can't explain why he couldn't make use of the one method whilst working for the other. But you ask an interesting question regarding why Voldemort is censured for his search for immortality whilst Flamel isn't. As suggested above, the search for immortality was a respectable scientific (viz, alchemical) pursuit for generations, even down to Isaac Newton. Flamel's apparent hogging of the secret is ethically troubling, especially as one suspects that Voldemort would be equally reluctant to share. Of course immortality for the human race as a whole would be disastrous; even if just the WW were given access to the secret and the Elixir, then overcrowding would no doubt ensue before too long, however just think of how many lives it might have saved. And if there are other reasons why immortality is deemed not so good a thing by the WW, then why did Flamel and his wife embrace it for so long? I suspect the answer is thematic. Flamel is presented to us as an example of deliberately (eventually) eschewing immortality even though he has it in his grasp, bolstering Dumbledore's view of death as the next great adventure (or was that Peter Pan? Something like that.) This contrasts with Voldemort and his desire for immortality beyond all else. I guess we're not meant to ask the more difficult questions. ~Eloise (who always wondered - and don't answer this here - whether Indiana Jones' father became immortal after drinking from the Holy Grail.) From bob.oliver at cox.net Wed Dec 8 10:18:12 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 10:18:12 -0000 Subject: Snape and Lupin's Character Arcs (was: Lupin's Char Arc) In-Reply-To: <20041208024353.71926.qmail@web53107.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119488 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Juli wrote: But is it really cruel what he's done? He hasn't > really done much but to tell Harry the truth and try > to protect him. > > Juli Well, he's also acted sadistically and arrogantly, publically humiliated Harry for no cause whatsoever, allowed his own childish emotions to override the greater good, and generally acted like a hysterical creep. As for telling Harry the truth, that's not his place. He generally has no right to bring up James at all. Whether he tells the truth or not is irrelevant. In terms of treating Harry like a hero -- well, Harry *is* a hero, and has proved it on several occasions. Being treated like one is only appropriate. So yes, it is really cruel what he's done. And yes, bad karma is by no means gone, but has only accumulated at a vastly accelerated rate since Harry entered Hogwarts. Lupinlore From bob.oliver at cox.net Wed Dec 8 10:36:21 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 10:36:21 -0000 Subject: Snape and McGonagall Re: Snape and Lupin's Character Arcs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119489 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "javalorum" wrote: > > > Hello, > > I joined the group only recently so I hope this doesn't sound too > blunt, or too familiar if this topic was already discussed way too > many times before. Welcome, Java. Don't worry, a little bluntness often helps around here. We have a way of going round and round like a dog chasing its tail. > > With regards to the older group, Snape and Sirius especially, they > seem to be involved in their school days a lot more than normal > people. I can sort of understand Sirius, considering he was sent to > prison not long after he left school. But still, bring up "back in > the good ol' days, me and James ..." and is kind of ... hmm, sad. I > know James was his best friend at school and all, but it just seems > he got nothing else to remember besides school days. And, even though > he was sent away shortly after graduation, that was probably still a > good 4, 5 years inbetween. For a kid that age, with that much good > looks and charisma, I would imagine his life after school (and James > being so involved with Lily) was only going to be more exciting, and > more memorable. But then, maybe he just didn't talk to Harry about > that, and the book was more from Harry's point of view. I agree that Sirius is a very sad character. I don't think there was quite as much time as you suppose, only 2-3 years. I'm also not so sure his experiences after school would be all that great. A lot of people who have a great time at school because of looks and charisma find that the "real" world isn't so amenable. It may well be that Sirius was disappointed in what he found after Hogwarts and was already developing a tendancy to try and hang on to the good old days, even before going to Azkaban. > > But for Snape to hang onto his school days like that is very hard to > understand. It's not like he enjoyed it. A lot of things must have > happened after he left school, growing up, seeing the real world. He > wasn't sent to prison. Yet he's still only focused on age 11-17. > Maybe he's just that narrow-minded and mean, and he only focuses on > bad things happened to him. I would imagine a person like that, going > into the real world, can only find a lot worse memories than school > days. However, his worst memory was when he was 15, and his worst > enemy, after 20+ years, is still James Potter. I think Snape is quite > eccentric and entertaining too, but because of this, sometimes I > think he exists in the HP universe just for Harry (teaching him life > lessons, in both good ways and bad), and not so much of a real > character. I agree that Snape is an over-the-top character who just isn't very believable at times. As you say, it's hard to imagine that someone who's lived 20+ years after Hogwarts and gone on to be a Death Eater wouldn't have greater scars than a rivalry with a school jock. Of course wounds inflicted in childhood tend to be the worst and longest lasting, but still. I also agree that Snape serves as a "moral device." We have five characters now with terrible (or at least challenging) childhoods: Harry, Snape, Sirius, Lupin, and Voldemort/Riddle. Four of them have never managed to overcome those childhoods. Sirius perhaps didn't have a fair chance, but nevertheless he tried to remain the reckless jock he was at Hogwarts. Riddle becomes evil. Snape poisons his soul with so much bitterness and anger that he becomes a twisted emotional cripple. Lupin develops an unhealthy desire to please people and be liked. Each of these represents a path that Harry should avoid. > > I hope this doesn't sound too harsh. I really like the book series, > but was somewhat disappointed by the last installment (still couldn't > help but reading it a few times though). I agree that OOTP was disappointing and definitely the worst of the books so far. Let's hope JKR redeems herself with HBP. Lupinlore From willsonkmom at msn.com Wed Dec 8 11:59:27 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 11:59:27 -0000 Subject: Snape and McGonagall Re: Snape and Lupin's Character Arcs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119490 Java wrote: >> With regards to the older group, Snape and Sirius especially, they > seem to be involved in their school days a lot more than normal > people. snip Potioncat: Welcome to the group! Yeah, these two are particularly bad at it. But even Molly does it a bit. Keep in mind though, we only see the characters at certain moments and at that time, remembering school days is part of the plot. Snape grumbles about James, but he's doing that when Harry's behavior is like James' was and the behavior is likely to put him into danger. Snape and Black turn into teenagers at HQ when Snape comes to discuss Occlumency. Sort of like grown siblings home for the holidays, replaying old grudges. As for the worst memory...that has everyone stumped! Potioncat From gbannister10 at aol.com Wed Dec 8 12:47:45 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 12:47:45 -0000 Subject: The Philospher's Stone (was: Harry's Protection (was Re: Questions)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119491 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "eloise_herisson" wrote: Eloise: > But you ask an interesting question regarding why Voldemort is > censured for his search for immortality whilst Flamel isn't. As > suggested above, the search for immortality was a respectable > scientific (viz, alchemical) pursuit for generations, even down to > Isaac Newton. Flamel's apparent hogging of the secret is ethically > troubling, especially as one suspects that Voldemort would be equally > reluctant to share. Of course immortality for the human race as a > whole would be disastrous; even if just the WW were given access to > the secret and the Elixir, then overcrowding would no doubt ensue > before too long, however just think of how many lives it might have > saved. And if there are other reasons why immortality is deemed not > so good a thing by the WW, then why did Flamel and his wife embrace > it for so long? > > I suspect the answer is thematic. Flamel is presented to us as an > example of deliberately (eventually) eschewing immortality even > though he has it in his grasp, bolstering Dumbledore's view of death > as the next great adventure (or was that Peter Pan? Something like > that.) This contrasts with Voldemort and his desire for immortality > beyond all else. I guess we're not meant to ask the more difficult > questions. Geoff: Dumbledore comments towards the end of PS: "You know, the Stone was really not such a wonderful thing. As much money and life as you could want! The two things most human beings would choose above all - the trouble is, humans do have a knack of choosing precisely those things which are worse for them." (PS "The Man with Two Faces" p.215 UK edition) "Flamel's apparent hogging" might have been merely being careful to whom he revealed information about the Stone because of the potential for misuse. He presumably brought Dumbledore in on the secret at some point well after he knew about it, judging by their difference in ages and it also would appear to be an open secret because he is mentioned on the Frog cards and also the "enormous old book" Hermione has for "light reading." (PS "Nicholas Flamel" pp.160/161 UK edition). When we look at the effect of money and long life on people in the Real World, one can understand why Flamel was cautious in whom he chose to join him. As Timothy in the New Testament famously remarks: "The love of money is the root of all evil". And I believe the wish for long life and power can be equally seductive. It depends on what you want money and long life for. As just one example look at the depths to which drug barons are prepared to plunge the unfortunates who become addicts to satisfy their own cravings for money and power. Why does Voldemort seek immortality? To give himself more power over others, to have longer to exert this power? Or fear of death, something over which he has no ultimate power? Is it to enjoy the sight of others suffering because of him? Immortality - at least in earthly form - is a highly questionable goal. In the recent discussion on the reality of its virtues which I have followed but not added too, I have on several occasions been reminded of the Q Continuum in Star Trek. In one of the Voyager episodes ("Death Wish"), a leading member of this group of immortals is found imprisoned in a comet because he wanted to commit suicide; immortality had become unendurable to him. Ultimately, he committed suicide after being released. Putting aside the prophecy and Harry getting into the act, I wonder whether Voldemort might be finally overcome by the ennui of the endless routine of finding things for sycophantic Death Eaters to do.... Imagine reading the financial market reports or the obituary columns for a couple of thousand years. :-) From theadimail at yahoo.co.in Wed Dec 8 13:17:03 2004 From: theadimail at yahoo.co.in (theadimail) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 13:17:03 -0000 Subject: Questions About Centaur Culture In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119492 > I have to be honest, but the prickly xenophobia on both sides of the dialogue between DU > and the centaurs has reminded me a lot of levels of gauche arrogance and blind > assumptions that have been the hallmarks of the current American administration's > dealings with non-Western societies. adi: A more apt example would be countries around the world resisting change and modernity saying that it is a threat to local culture, or resisting pizzas and jeans (and sex )saying that globalisation is americanisation or resisting democracy saying that it is a "western" concept. Come to think of it, the herd of centaurs looks strikingly similar to the sheikhdom of Saudi Arabia or the mullahs of Iran. From elsyee_h at yahoo.com Wed Dec 8 13:54:36 2004 From: elsyee_h at yahoo.com (Tammy) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 13:54:36 -0000 Subject: The Philospher's Stone (was: Harry's Protection (was Re: Questions)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119493 > Eloise (chiming in late): *snipping Eloise's very interesting explanations of immortality, the search for it, and very sad for having to snip it* > But you ask an interesting question regarding why Voldemort is > censured for his search for immortality whilst Flamel isn't. As > suggested above, the search for immortality was a respectable > scientific (viz, alchemical) pursuit for generations, even down to > Isaac Newton. Flamel's apparent hogging of the secret is ethically > troubling, especially as one suspects that Voldemort would be equally > reluctant to share. Of course immortality for the human race as a > whole would be disastrous; even if just the WW were given access to > the secret and the Elixir, then overcrowding would no doubt ensue > before too long, however just think of how many lives it might have > saved. And if there are other reasons why immortality is deemed not > so good a thing by the WW, then why did Flamel and his wife embrace > it for so long? > > I suspect the answer is thematic. Flamel is presented to us as an > example of deliberately (eventually) eschewing immortality even > though he has it in his grasp, bolstering Dumbledore's view of death > as the next great adventure (or was that Peter Pan? Something like > that.) This contrasts with Voldemort and his desire for immortality > beyond all else. I guess we're not meant to ask the more difficult > questions. > Tammy replies: I think it coems down to purpose. Flamel, presumably, sought immortality for either a noble purpose or just because he was afraid of death. Voldemort on the other hand seeks immortality so that he can use it to gain more power over others. Perhaps it's yet another lesson that it's not what you do, but why you do it. But then again, isn't just another life lesson that the "good people" can get away with whatever they like, while the "bad people" who try to do the same things get yelled at for it? -Tammy, who really should have waited to reply to this until she's p.c.(post coffee) and better able to think From quigonginger at yahoo.com Wed Dec 8 14:46:34 2004 From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 14:46:34 -0000 Subject: Warlock/Wizard - was Asking JKR just one question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119494 > Ginger: (previously) > > In chapter 3 of CoS, Ron, Fred and George pick Harry up to take him > > to the Burrow. Harry asks how they knew he was in trouble. Ron > > reminds him that Arthur works for the MoM. Harry asks what he > does. > > Ron tells him about it and comments "it's only him and an old > warlock > > called Perkins in the office". (US paperback p. 31) > > > Geoff: > Ten points to Gryffindor (asuming that's your house)! I must file > that one away for reference. Ginger now: Actually, I am a Hufflepuff. Unfortunately, I have to pass on the points to Vivamus, who corrected an error of mine. I had stated the venerable looking warlocks were reading Transfiguration Today, but it was wizards who were venerable looking and reading. The warlocks were the rowdy bunch. Thanks Vivamus. 10 points to your house! Back to the whole wizard/warlock thing. It struck me that we have never heard of a young warlock. Young as in underage. Perhaps wizard is used like we would say "guy" and warlock is used as we would say "man". There's not much difference at all when speaking of men, but guys can be any age. It would explain how Harry can easily detect them (duh, they're adults) and how the descriptions vary so much. It's a thought, Ginger, watching L.O.O.N.acy dreams swirl down the drain like so much bad couscous. From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Wed Dec 8 14:58:54 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 14:58:54 -0000 Subject: The Philospher's Stone (was: Harry's Protection (was Re: Questions)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119495 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "eloise_herisson" wrote: > (with snips) Eloise (chiming in late): I hadn't thought about this until you two mentioned it, but yes, there are some interesting questions raised here about the Philosopher's Stone. If there were just one Philosopher's Stone and one wizard in command of its secret (plus possibly Dumbledore and any other partners he had previously) then surely both Flamel and the Stone itself should have been the target of every power-mad/immortality -seeking wizard for centuries. In fact, why did Voldemort go through all those dangerous, disfiguring experiments in his own search for immortality when the answer, in the form of the Philosopher's Stone and the Elixir of Life was there all the time? Are we really to believe that Voldemort, pre his downfall wasn't powerful enough to have gained control of the Stone then? Did he really have to wait until he was himself powerless in order to try to win it? Something doesn't add up there. But you ask an interesting question regarding why Voldemort is censured for his search for immortality whilst Flamel isn't. And if there are other reasons why immortality is deemed not so good a thing by the WW, then why did Flamel and his wife embrace it for so long? I suspect the answer is thematic. Flamel is presented to us as an example of deliberately (eventually) eschewing immortality even though he has it in his grasp, bolstering Dumbledore's view of death as the next great adventure (or was that Peter Pan? Something like that.) This contrasts with Voldemort and his desire for immortality beyond all else. I guess we're not meant to ask the more difficult questions. > Hmm. Things are quiet, it's ages until the next book is released, there's not much being discussed on the board that grabs my attention at the moment; all in all an ideal opportunity to consider some of the more neglected topics in canon - and aspects of the Stone story are worth a look IMO. As usual JKR has given a twist to folklore/mythology - as you say the 'Stone' wasn't really a stone but a formulation, yet it's presented in HP as a rock-like artifact. There's a possibility that she's changed a few other things too - probably to get a better fit into the plot-line. For example - there was a general assumption among the old alchemists that you'd only have to use the Stone *once* to achieve your aims - just as base metals transmuted into incorruptible gold remained incorruptible gold forever, so also a person would be cured of all physical imperfections forever. At the time the natural conclusion was that this meant immortality. The emphasis has been changed too; originally the concept of the formulation was solely concentrated on the transmutation of metals, the immortality bit was a later addition to alchemical thinking. In the Potterverse JKR seems to put the cart before the horse - it's the prospect of eternal life that is pre-eminent, recycling baked beans cans to pay off the mortgage comes in a very distant second. What is evident is that in HP the Stone is supposed to endow immortality to the *physical* body. This is a key distinction IMO, squatting as I am behind the ramparts of Possession Theory. Voldy's spirit/essence/mind did not die at GH, though his body was destroyed (or so we assume), but without a corporate aspect he becomes almost powerless, though the 'almost' is important - he's still able to possess other beings. If he can only slot this essence into a body that has a user guarantee stretching to eternity - well, he's set for life - and it'll be a *very* long one, approximately until the heat death of the universe. On the other hand Vapour!Mort (a combination of Salazar's timeless malice and power - which is damned near immortal in my theories; it's lasted 1000 years already - and Tom's mind) can always be stymied by ripping it out of its current body and denying it another - just what happened after GH until Quirrell came along. He's OK as a temporary home, resting your chin on some-one's back collar stud works to a certain extent, but it can only be temporary. Until Vapour!Mort can find/construct a body matching it's own longevity, it'll be a sort of wizardly hermit crab forever scuttling from one bodily resting place to another as the old one wears out or gets zapped. Enter Flamel's Stone. The answer to a maidens prayer - or rather, Voldy's dreams. Get his sweaty mitts on that and his worries will be over. Of course many fans have wondered about the back-story to the Flamels, their association with DD and why the hell Voldy didn't drop round their place one night before GH and beat, threaten or Legilimise the Stone or the formulation out of them. That would fit his usual practices, you'd think. It's not as if the Flamels or old Nick's success were a secret, is it? But no; Voldy isn't a villain that thinks, no Cassius he. He waits until everything goes pear-shaped, his dastardly plans dashed, spends 10 years having a meeting of minds with the local rodentia in some primitive back-water before coming out for round two. Seems very providential that he reappears when he does. Or is it providential? Right. This is where Kneasy constructs his own back-story, based on his reading of characterisation and story arc. It wasn't providential at all - DD deliberately lured him out using the Stone as bait. Much better to tackle Voldy before Voldy is ready than wait until he is back in full fig and possibly already immortal. DD had never believed that Voldy had gone for good, he tells us that. Young Potter (according to the Prophecy) is Voldy's Bane - the one to sort him out. That's unlikely to happen if Voldy stays down in the woods playing "pass the nuts" with the local squirrels. Besides, left to his own devices Voldy might just solve his problems by coming up with a cunning plan that DD will have no control over or input to at all. As it is, DD knows exactly what Voldy is after, the macguffin is under DD's control - and so is Harry. The implications of Voldy's rant in the graveyard, where he goes on about how he almost became immortal, suggest that there are routes to this end other than the Stone. Or perhaps it's just that he thought there were. Certainly nothing has been said about the Stone being central to his plans before the first book; he travels the world, learns strange things, yet apparently never finds out that there's this bloke who's already cracked it. Very odd. He needs a decent search engine - the one he's got is too similar to Yahoo!Mort for comfort. Unless - and here's a thought - the Flamels don't exist - they're DD's invention - and so is the Stone - devised to catch Voldy's attention. It'd certainly explain why there isn't a queue 5 miles long pointing to the Flamel's front door. Just a throw-away comment on a Chocolate Frog card, rig an entry in a book in the Hogwarts library, start a rumour or two and Voldy's hooked. Or is that a conspiracy theory too far? Try another - DD is Nicholas Flamel, reborn/revitalised every couple of centuries - just like Fawkes. In which case, if we accept JKR's premises on the need for a top-up of elixir every so often, and if the Stone has really been destroyed, then DD is on his last legs. No wonder he's described as tired and old. When it comes to the crunch an immortal Voldy is not a problem. A powerful immortal Voldy - that's a problem. So with what we know or surmise already, Voldy could be controlled by separating his mind from his body and locking that mind/essence back in the Chamber where Tom found it. Problem solved - until in another 1000 years somebody else decides to enter the Chamber. From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Dec 8 15:17:46 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 15:17:46 -0000 Subject: Is Snape really THAT good in Potions?(was: Snape and the Kappa) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119496 Neri wrote: > > After Nora found a textbook example that Snape might not be such > > an expert in DADA as he is cracked up to be, I had a REALLY > > strange thought: Why do we all assume that Snape is such a wiz in > > Potions? I've raked my brains, and as far as I can remember the > > only canon source for that is Lupin, who tells Harry in PoA that > > the Wolfbane Potion is very complex and very few potion masters > > are up to it. Can someone corroborate Snape's expertise from a > > different source? Potioncat: > Brace yourself, Neri... I think you have a good point. > > Snape is a Potions Master which translated into modern American > English is a Potions teacher. It does not correspond to Master > Carpenter or some such. The title alone does not mean he is far > more talented than the standard wizard. Although one would always > hope that a teacher knows more about his/her topic than the > standard individual does. SSSusan: Brace *your*self, Potioncat, for you're agreeing w/ Neri and I'm disagreeing with you! (Actually, I'm not disagreeing w/ your assessment of Snape's skills, but only w/ the term "master.") I think Potions *Master* IS an important term to take into consideration when evaluating Snape's abilities. We don't hear anyone refer to Flitwick as the Charms Master, nor McGonagall as the Transfiguration Master. Now, I can't speak to whether "Master" would be a both-gender appellation, but we do have the example of Flitwick. He's always teacher or professor; not master. Don't you think we're *meant* to take from that information that Snape *is* considered an expert? Siriusly Snapey Susan, who doesn't believe Snape is a master *teacher* but does believe he's a master potions maker. From willsonkmom at msn.com Wed Dec 8 16:07:26 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 16:07:26 -0000 Subject: Is Snape really THAT good in Potions?(was: Snape and the Kappa) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119497 > SSSusan: > Brace *your*self, Potioncat, for you're agreeing w/ Neri and I'm > disagreeing with you! (Actually, I'm not disagreeing w/ your > assessment of Snape's skills, but only w/ the term "master.") > > I think Potions *Master* IS an important term to take into > consideration when evaluating Snape's abilities. We don't hear > anyone refer to Flitwick as the Charms Master, nor McGonagall as the > Transfiguration Master. Now, I can't speak to whether "Master" would > be a both-gender appellation, but we do have the example of > Flitwick. He's always teacher or professor; not master. Don't you > think we're *meant* to take from that information that Snape *is* > considered an expert? > > Siriusly Snapey Susan, who doesn't believe Snape is a master > *teacher* but does believe he's a master potions maker. Potioncat: Something you said made me think of another possibility, but here goes. Having read many posts over the past year and a half from the British fans who tell us master was a common phrase for teacher in the old days, and having just read "To Serve Them All My Days" (TSTAMD in the remainder of this post) I've seen the light. Master is used in TSTAMD several times to simply refer to teacher, although teacher is used too. I think you're right, no one calls Flitwick the Charms Master. But Potions Master still means Potions teacher. And when Snape tries to uncover the purpose of Harry's spare bit of parchment, he refers to himself as a master of Hogwarts (a teacher of Hogwarts)(Sorry, I don't have the exact quote.) JKR was of course, writing for an English public at first and would ahve expected master to be understood as teacher, even if it isn't used today. Here is where SSSusan gave me an idea: It could be that JKR is using Potion Master as Potion Teacher but is also implying or will reveal a stronger meaning of the word. But I don't think there is a profession in the WW of Potion Masters outside of the school setting. Potioncat(who would like to thank Geoff, again, for recommending TSTAMD.) From steve51445 at adelphia.net Wed Dec 8 17:07:56 2004 From: steve51445 at adelphia.net (Steve) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 17:07:56 -0000 Subject: Hermione's Patonus Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119498 On IMDB there is a bit of a trivia contest going on. One of the questions was: What form does Hermionie's patronus take? Of course we know that it's an otter. Another person added that Ron lives in Ottery St. Catchpole, possibly as a clue to a R/H ship. I did a little searching and found that not only are otters releted to weasels, but also to badgers (Hufflepuff), stoats (Stoatshead Hill), and polecats (Catchpole?) I'm not very up on my UK geography, are there any weasel family name of places in Devon? Is this one of JKR's name games, or just a weird coincedence? Steve, Who is now wondering why Ron didn't know who Luna was before when she lives so close by. From foxmoth at qnet.com Wed Dec 8 17:23:03 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 17:23:03 -0000 Subject: Warlock/Wizard - was Asking JKR just one question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119499 Ginger: > > Back to the whole wizard/warlock thing. It struck me that we have never heard of a young warlock. Young as in underage. Perhaps wizard is used like we would say "guy" and warlock is used as we would say "man". There's not much difference at all when speaking of men, but guys can be any age. > Pippin: I think this is close, but IMO, warlock is an older term for wizard. Like 'wizard', it had a general sense embracing both males and females, but could also be used to mean only males. The first sense survives in the names of titles and organizations dating from earlier times. Nowadays the word is more commonly used only of males, when the speaker wants to emphasize either the sex or the advanced age (because the term is archaic) of the wizard in question. So when Ron calls old Perkins a warlock, he's emphasizing how very old Perkins is, and when Ernie refers to nine generations of warlocks, he's emphasizing the ancientry of his family line. The rowdy group of warlocks is being boisterous in the manner associated with male-only groups. Just my opinion, of course. Pippin From caseylane at wideopenwest.com Wed Dec 8 17:46:29 2004 From: caseylane at wideopenwest.com (Casey) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 17:46:29 -0000 Subject: Is Snape really THAT good in Potions?(was: Snape and the Kappa) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119500 > Casey: > So, diabetic's know how to make their own insulin? I should know how > to make my Prevacid? Even if I had the materials and written > instructions to follow, I don't think I would want to take that > risk. Nope, I leave that job to the Snapes of the world. > > > Alla: > > I don't think the analogy with Muggle medicine is quite applicable. > Not every muggle takes pharmacology course, in fact only those who > wish to become pharmacists. > EVERY wizard takes Potion course in school , so theoretically all of > them have to be able to brew some potions. > Casey: Well, everyone at my high school had four years of english so does that mean we can all write a best seller? We also had four years of math but that doesn't make me able to do the more advanced formulas that someone working for NASA or an aircraft company would be able to do. From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Dec 8 17:47:57 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 17:47:57 -0000 Subject: The Philospher's Stone (was: Harry's Protection (was Re: Questions)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119501 Eloise: > > But you ask an interesting question regarding why Voldemort is > > censured for his search for immortality whilst Flamel isn't. As > > suggested above, the search for immortality was a respectable > > scientific (viz, alchemical) pursuit for generations, even down > > to Isaac Newton. Flamel's apparent hogging of the secret is > > ethically troubling, especially as one suspects that Voldemort > > would be equally reluctant to share. Of course immortality for > > the human race as a whole would be disastrous; even if just the > > WW were given access to the secret and the Elixir, then > > overcrowding would no doubt ensue before too long, however just > > think of how many lives it might have saved. And if there are > > other reasons why immortality is deemed not so good a thing by > > the WW, then why did Flamel and his wife embrace it for so long? Geoff: > Dumbledore comments towards the end of PS: > > "You know, the Stone was really not such a wonderful thing. As > much money and life as you could want! The two things most human > beings would choose above all - the trouble is, humans do have a > knack of choosing precisely those things which are worse for them." > (PS "The Man with Two Faces" p.215 UK edition) > > "Flamel's apparent hogging" might have been merely being careful to > whom he revealed information about the Stone because of the > potential for misuse. SSSusan: Excellent explanations. Which, for me at least, beg the question: What would be a "proper" or "appropriate" use for the stone, then? Siriusly Snapey Susan From caseylane at wideopenwest.com Wed Dec 8 17:51:59 2004 From: caseylane at wideopenwest.com (Casey) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 17:51:59 -0000 Subject: Snape and McGonagall Re: Snape and Lupin's Character Arcs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119502 > > But for Snape to hang onto his school days like that is very hard to > understand. It's not like he enjoyed it. A lot of things must have > happened after he left school, growing up, seeing the real world. He > wasn't sent to prison. Yet he's still only focused on age 11-17. Well, Snape works in the same environment so I can understand a bit more about those memories still being more alive. Especially when he see's the son of his tormentor coming to the school and already, not only ignoring the rules as his tormentor did, but he and his friends start getting rewards because of it. However, his worst memory was when he was 15, and his worst > enemy, after 20+ years, is still James Potter.> > I hope this doesn't sound too harsh. I really like the book series, > but was somewhat disappointed by the last installment (still couldn't > help but reading it a few times though). > > Thanks for your attention, > Java I think we must be oddballs in my house. My grown daughter and I both loved OotP over every other HP book so far. Casey From stevejjen at earthlink.net Wed Dec 8 18:22:56 2004 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 18:22:56 -0000 Subject: The Philospher's Stone (was: Harry's Protection (was Re: Questions)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119503 > Eloise: > In fact, why did Voldemort go through all those dangerous, > disfiguring experiments in his own search for immortality when the > answer, in the form of the Philosopher's Stone and the Elixir of Life > was there all the time? Are we really to believe that Voldemort, pre > his downfall wasn't powerful enough to have gained control of the > Stone then? Did he really have to wait until he was himself powerless > in order to try to win it? Something doesn't add up there. > > But you ask an interesting question regarding why Voldemort is > censured for his search for immortality whilst Flamel isn't. Jen: In alchemy, the process is equally important (or more important?) than the end result. As the base metals are purified into gold, so the apprentice is purified and transformed. It's a life's work and requires a devoted servant to perfect the process and move through each level on the way to immortality. Presumably Flamel's work would be considered a spiritual transformation and Voldemort's work was the antithesis of this. But then, Dumbledore seems a little dismissive about immortality in general, when he equates it with gaining "as much money and life as you could want!" (SS, chap. 17, p. 297) So I'm not certain JKR wants us to revere immortality in whatever form a person comes by it. Kneasy: > Try another - DD is Nicholas Flamel, reborn/revitalised every > couple of centuries - just like Fawkes. In which case, if we accept > JKR's premises on the need for a top-up of elixir every so often, > and if the Stone has really been destroyed, then DD is on his last > legs. No wonder he's described as tired and old. Jen: Immortal!Dumbledore could explain a few things. But as someone pointed out to me when reasoning along those lines, this would pretty much render useless, not to mention hypocritical, all of Dumbledore's speeches about death. Now that doesn't bother you, Kneasy, but it makes me uncomfortable. Those big endings, where Dumbledore explains the world, seem to be the crux of JKR's story. Kneasy: > When it comes to the crunch an immortal Voldy is not a problem. > A powerful immortal Voldy - that's a problem. > So with what we know or surmise already, Voldy could be controlled > by separating his mind from his body and locking that mind/essence > back in the Chamber where Tom found it. > > Problem solved - until in another 1000 years somebody else > decides to enter the Chamber. Jen: I'm intrigued. There does seem to be a theme that evil can't be defeated, only pushed back again and again. But how would Harry be involved? Would he need to channel GG in order to coerce Slytherin back into the chamber? Now I'm being reminded of the "Yu-gi-oh" TV show. 1000 years ago an ancient Egyptian pharaoh locked away the "shadow games," i.e., the force of destructive evil/world domination, in a series of artifacts. A young boy innocently unleashes the spirits by unlocking an ancient puzzle and then shares his body with the powerful spirit of the pharaoh. They have to save the world together. It's a very similar theme, albeit poorly done sometimes. Jen From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Wed Dec 8 18:24:25 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 10:24:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] The Philospher's Stone (was: Harry's Protection (was Re: Questions)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041208182425.7034.qmail@web53109.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119504 --- eloise_herisson wrote: > This being the case and Flamel having found the formula, it doesn't > seem to have been shared, it has remained a secret. At the very > least > it doesn't seem to be accessible to anyone else as we haven't heard > of anyone else making use of it. > > Likewise, there appears to have been only *one* Philosopher's stone > in existence. Granted, Flamel only needed one for his personal use, > but was he unable to repeat the experiment to make more? If the > search for immortality is so universal (it certainly seems to have > been in the days of the alchemists) then surely it was something to > be shared? > > > > In fact, why did Voldemort go through all those dangerous, > disfiguring experiments in his own search for immortality when the > answer, in the form of the Philosopher's Stone and the Elixir of > Life was there all the time? > > ~Eloise Very good questions and I don't claim to know the answers - but I'm betting that one of the things we'll find out in the future is that Snape started working at Hogwarts with Voldemort's blessing so that he'd be on the spot to find out the Philosopher's Stone recipe from Dumbledore. Of course, since Snape was already Dumbledore's spy, this was a perfect arrangement for both of them, and might even have been Dumbledore's idea. As you say, the knowledge that Flamel had created a PS doesn't seem to have been a huge secret (chocolate frog cards, after all) and so it's quite likely that Voldemort was trying to recreate the recipe at the time. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone. http://mobile.yahoo.com/maildemo From foxmoth at qnet.com Wed Dec 8 18:40:28 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 18:40:28 -0000 Subject: Snape and Lupin's Character Arcs (was: Lupin's Char Arc) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119505 > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Juli wrote: > > > But is it really cruel what he's done? He hasn't > > really done much but to tell Harry the truth and try > > to protect him. > > > > Juli Lupinlore: > Well, he's also acted sadistically and arrogantly, publically humiliated Harry for no cause whatsoever, allowed his own childish emotions to override the greater good, and generally acted like a hysterical creep. < Pippin: One of the cosmic penalties for being a jerk is that people perceive you as worse than you really are. We saw that in PS/SS. But that too is an error (in the context of reality --I am not referring to misperceiving fictional characters ) and should carry a penalty. I expect that Harry will come to think that Snape has betrayed the Order, and somehow betray Snape in return. Harry will then realize his error and rescue Snape, which will of course be a highly humiliating experience as far as Snape is concerned. The last thing he wants is to be saved by Potter *again.* Harry will agonize for a few chapters and then, despite his fears that Snape will do something dreadful to him, he will admit to Snape that it was his fault Snape needed rescuing. That will be what finally convinces Snape that Potter is not a second edition of his arrogant father, because neither James nor Harry ever acknowledged before that they were in the wrong. Snape will be furious, but Harry will eventually realize that he did not get in any more trouble for having admitted being in the wrong than he would have been if he hadn't. Having exchanged accurate information for once, Snape and Harry will be able to figure out what happened and identify the real traitor. Of course they will be wrong, setting up some more dramatic reversals. But I think it will be Snape who finally tells Harry what he has to do to destroy Voldemort, proving once and for all which side he is on. Personally, I don't think Snape is going to die, just revert to his natural form. Maybe the four existing Houses will be consolidated into one, advancing the chivalry and courage of Gryffindor, the wisdom of Ravenclaw, the patience and charity of Hufflepuff and the Slytherin conviction that rules aren't everything. But there will still be houses at Hogwarts representing the magical races, and Snape can hang out in the dungeons as Head of Vampire House. Lupinlore: > In terms of treating Harry like a hero -- well, Harry *is* a hero, and has proved it on several occasions. Being treated like one is only appropriate.< Pippin: Snape has denigrated Harry's celebrity status only twice, IIRC. Once during the first class when he was indeed only famous for being famous, and once when Harry seemed to think that being Harry Potter meant Sirius wouldn't dare attack him. It was not appropriate, IMO, to treat Harry like a hero at those times. Pippin From willsonkmom at msn.com Wed Dec 8 18:38:09 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 18:38:09 -0000 Subject: Is Snape really THAT good in Potions?(was: Snape and the Kappa) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119506 > > Casey: > > So, diabetic's know how to make their own insulin? I should know > how > > to make my Prevacid? Even if I had the materials and written > > instructions to follow, I don't think I would want to take that > > risk. Nope, I leave that job to the Snapes of the world. > > > > > > Alla: > > > > I don't think the analogy with Muggle medicine is quite > applicable. > > Not every muggle takes pharmacology course, in fact only those who > > wish to become pharmacists. > > EVERY wizard takes Potion course in school , so theoretically all > of > > them have to be able to brew some potions. > > > Casey's next post snipped because I'm trying to do things correctly. Potioncat: Now, now. Have some ginger newts, you're both right. In the real world kids get enough chemistry to have an idea of what it is. In the WW, very young kids are making potions that shrink a frog into a tadpole. I can't think of any RW comparison to that. Every student leaves Hogwarts knowing how to make certain potions. Not every student studies N.E.W.T. level Potions nor do all of those pass the exams. So most could make a potion to cure warts, not everyone could make Wolfsbane. If Lupin is being honest, perhaps not every N.E.W.T. level wizard could make it, even with the instructions. I have to admit, Pippin has influenced me enough that I wonder if Lupin is telling the truth about his own ability at potions. But we don't know if he passed Potion O.W.L.s or if he took the N.E.W.T. level Potions class. Potion*Molly*cat From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 8 18:41:47 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 18:41:47 -0000 Subject: Voldemort's "death" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119507 > Carol responds: > Yes. It seems to be a general consensus that the power behind the > locked door and the force that saved Harry from being possessed by > Voldemort are the same thing (although I remember a recent argument > about a distinction between the two that I confess to not reading > carefully enough to paraphrase). At any rate, sacrificial love seems > like the likeliest candidate of the forces or powers that have been > proposed so far though I don't see Harry as being any more loving than a lot of other people. Altruism might come closer, but that certainly isn't what motivated Harry when he wanted to die and be with Sirius rather than be possessed by Voldemort. Willingness to die, maybe? I don't mind that hypothesis as long as it doesn't result in his *actual* death. But nothing has been resolved by JKR, much less agreed upon by the members of this list. Kim now: I had the idea in an earlier post that the power in that locked room was something akin to "truth," which I think could mean all the mysterious powers in the universe all rolled into one. Love and hate, good and evil, life and death, the balance of all opposite extremes (as the Buddhists might say), or perhaps the force that understands all things because all things are contained within it. Of course to others that could also be a description of God (but I don't want to start getting into too much of a religious discussion here). So when Voldemort possessed Harry in the MoM battle, he was "vanquished" because he couldn't face the "truth" about himself: that he was incapable of love (in that instance it was embodied in the love that Harry was feeling for Sirius). Voldemort is so incapable of love, that it seems to pain him physically to be in its presence. Gee, if we didn't all hate LV so much, we might actually feel some pity for him... ;-) Carol wrote: >Whether Fudge is ESE! or merely stupid, he has deprived the WW of a > witness to the return of Voldemort. But more to the point, Barty Jr. > is now a soulless body. What that means, whether he's like a zombie or eats and drinks and sleeps but has no memories or human feelings, I > can't say. I'm guessing that he's in St. Mungo's, but it doesn't > really matter where his body is. His soul is inside a Dementor, gone > forever, dissolved into nothingness. At least that's how I understand it. And that, to me, seems like an appropriate fate for Voldemort, but only if it can be arranged without Harry having to be a Dementor's victim himself. Kim now: Do you remember if JKR's intention with the Dementors was to invent a creature who is the embodiment of depression or despair? (Am I too lazy to go online and look for that information myself? Answer: Yes! Actually I'm just too busy with other things right now). Because in that sense, their "kiss" would leave a person pretty much without a soul (at least in the figurative sense). Some would say that a body can't live long, if at all, without a soul inside it, but this is JKR's world, after all, so somehow Barty Jr. was able to survive his brush with a Dementor. Yes, it would be nice to actually know what state the Dementor's kiss had left him in. I wonder if he'll show up again in the next books (along with Gilderoy Lockhart... maybe they could hang out together at St. Mungo's; Gilderoy could talk endlessly about himself and Barty would sit there not really listening and staring off into space...) When you think about it, the Dementors are just about as dangerous to people's welfare as LV is... Who or what are those creepy critters? Kim (who is not trying to be annoying by continuing to ask questions that she doesn't know the answers to) From McGregorMax at ec.rr.com Wed Dec 8 18:41:03 2004 From: McGregorMax at ec.rr.com (mcmaxslb) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 18:41:03 -0000 Subject: Hermione's Patonus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119508 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > > On IMDB there is a bit of a trivia contest going on. One of the > questions was: What form does Hermionie's patronus take? Of course > we know that it's an otter. Another person added that Ron lives in > Ottery St. Catchpole, possibly as a clue to a R/H ship....Steve, Hermione's otter patronus has nothing to do with any possable R/Hr ship(ick). The otter is JKR's favorite animal and that is why it is Hermione's patronus. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 8 18:49:11 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 18:49:11 -0000 Subject: Voledmort's "immortality" (Was:The Philospher's Stone) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119509 Eloise wrote: > In fact, why did Voldemort go through all those dangerous, > disfiguring experiments in his own search for immortality when the > answer, in the form of the Philosopher's Stone and the Elixir of Life was there all the time? Are we really to believe that Voldemort, pre his downfall wasn't powerful enough to have gained control of the > Stone then? Did he really have to wait until he was himself powerless in order to try to win it? Something doesn't add up there. > > There are two ways I can see to explain the anomaly. One is the > boring one: the Philospher's Stone plays kind of a central role in > PS/SS and if account were taken of all my objections, then there > wouldn't really be a plot. > > The other is that the kind of immortality being offered is different, though what that means, I'm not sure. Voldemort seems to be working towards making himself innately immortal, rather than dependent on an elixir but I can't explain why he couldn't make use of the one method whilst working for the other. Carol responds: I agree with your last paragraph--Voldemort was trying to become immortal in a way that didn't depend on drinking an elixir, or even possessing the Philosopher's Stone or the formula to make one. Possibly that was a step he intended to take all along, but it wasn't the only thing he was doing. Somehow the transformations that resulted in his snakelike appearance were also a step on his journey toward earthly immortality, that is, deathlessness (as opposed to eternal life after death, a condition in which he's not interested). I'm wondering if he turned himself into various kinds of snakes or even drank small doses of their venom in order to immunize himself against death by poison, or certain kinds of poison. Note that Nagini's "milk," which would kill anyone else, even a wizard, or at least put them in mortal peril, as it did Arthur Weasley (assuming that the snake LV possessed was Nagini), keeps Baby!mort alive or, if he's already immortal, sustains him and gives him sufficient strength to hold a wand and cast a spell. (Peter Pettigrew must have suspected or believed that the thing was deathless and possessed the power to harm him even in that form, though, or he wouldn't have tended it. Either that or he *wanted* Voldemort restored to his former self, but I'm getting sidetracked as usual.) Anyway, I think that snake venom was somehow involved in Voldemort's search for immortality, which suggests that immunity to poisons of various types might have been one of the steps he took (a possible use for young Severus Snape when he joined the DEs). Perhaps there were other forms of death to which a wizard is subject (AK, of course, being one of them, and old age another) that he also tried to make himself immune to. So the steps Voldemort took, I'm guessing, were protections against particular kinds of death, that is, against death by a particular means, rather like Muggle vaccinations against Polio and influenza. The problem for me is, in part, that we still don't know exactly what can kill a wizard. Would a Muggle weapon, such as a policeman's pistol, kill or harm an ordinary wizard like Lucius Malfoy? What about an enchanted Muggle weapon, such as Godric Gryffindor's sword, or possibly Macnair's axe? Are all wizards immune to that sort of death, or has Voldemort placed some sort of special protection on himself against death from physical injury that somehow enabled him to survive the AK that disintegrated his body at Godric's Hollow? Or maybe physical injury and AK were separate protections? There may be other spells, like the one that blew Benjy Fenwick apart or the one Pettigrew used to blow up the street, that can kill a wizard. Carol, wondering how Alastor Moody could lose a leg, an eye, and a part of his nose after battles with DEs and yet, presumably, be pieced back together good as new after being "splinched" From foxmoth at qnet.com Wed Dec 8 19:02:13 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 19:02:13 -0000 Subject: Snape and McGonagall Re: Snape and Lupin's Character Arcs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119510 Java: > But for Snape to hang onto his school days like that is very hard to understand. It's not like he enjoyed it. A lot of things must have happened after he left school, growing up, seeing the real world. He wasn't sent to prison. Yet he's still only focused on age 11-17. Maybe he's just that narrow-minded and mean, and he only focuses on bad things happened to him. I would imagine a person like that, going into the real world, can only find a lot worse memories than school days. However, his worst memory was when he was 15, and his worst enemy, after 20+ years, is still James Potter. Pippin: Welcome, Java! JKR stated in the Edinburgh appearance that Snape has seen some things while he was in the Death Eaters, so I think the chapter title "Snape's Worse Memory" can be taken as reflecting the narrator's point of view, which is not necessarily the author's. The narrator of the books writes about Harry as if he had been observing him all his life, but often does not actually know or understand more than Harry himself does. For example in PS/SS, the narrator states that Harry has lived with the Dursleys ever since his parents died in that car crash. You'll find it's a matter of constant debate on this list whether Snape is really as blindly obsessed with his schoolboy grudges as he appears to be, or whether, like a method actor, he is magnifying those feelings in order to disguise from his former associates in the DE's how much he has changed. Pippin From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 8 19:34:48 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 19:34:48 -0000 Subject: Snape and McGonagall Re: Snape and Lupin's Character Arcs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119511 Lupinlore wrote: > I agree that Sirius is a very sad character. I don't think there was quite as much time as you suppose, only 2-3 years. I'm also not so sure his experiences after school would be all that great. A lot of people who have a great time at school because of looks and charisma find that the "real" world isn't so amenable. It may well be that Sirius was disappointed in what he found after Hogwarts and was already developing a tendancy to try and hang on to the good old days, even before going to Azkaban. Carol responds: While I very much disagree with Lupinlore's view of *Snape* as a one-dimensional character whose worst memory stems from his teenage years (that's Harry's perception as voiced by the narrator), I actually agree with him here. When Sirius left Hogwarts, he was distanced from his own family and had only the Potters, who had informally adopted him. Then James's parents died or were murdered, and James himself got married and was presumably less available for risky adventures than he had been as a schoolboy. They were no longer inseparable companions, especially after James became a father as well as a husband. Sirius must have used the Order as a surrogate Hogwarts, a new source of adventures, this time for a good cause but also at much greater risk. But meantime there seems to have been some sort of distancing between him and Remus Lupin, a mutual mistrust that probably had some relation to Lupin's being a werewolf. And perhaps Lupin silently resented his own inability to get (or keep) a paying job whereas Sirius (and James) had no need for one. Their priorities were different, and they were no longer roommates keeping their exciting secret from their schoolmates. And Peter, too, was worm(tailing) his way between the Potters and both Sirius and Remus, as indicated by the photograph of the Order. It's interesting, however, that Sirius was best man at the Potter's wedding (no indication that the other two were present although they must have been) and that Sirius alone attended Harry's baptism, where he served as godfather. The group was clearly disintegrating at that point. In addition, Sirius must have known that as members of the Order, if for no other reason, he and James and the others were in grave danger. It was no longer a matter of hexing for entertainment and playing deadly pranks on schoolboy rivals. They were engaged in a real war against deadly enemies, Voldemort and his Death Eaters. So to me it's no wonder that Sirius in OoP focuses on his carefree schooldays, when the worst consequence of his recklessness (in his mind) was detention (I really don't think he really considered the potential consequences of the so-called Prank for anyone, including himself, and particularly not for Remus Lupin). There was nothing fun about the years that followed: the disintegration of a four-way friendship, the deadly serious business of being an Order member, the death of the Potters, his own idiotic mistake in proposing Peter as Secret Keeper, his rash pursuit of Peter after Godric's Hollow and the horrible consequences. . . . It makes perfect sense for Sirius to focus on his schooldays, the only happy time in his short life. Carol, who thinks that most of Sirius's problems can be traced to his own errors in judgment but nevertheless sees him as a tragic character whose rashness is his hamartia (tragic flaw) From steve51445 at adelphia.net Wed Dec 8 19:38:35 2004 From: steve51445 at adelphia.net (Steve) Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 14:38:35 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Hermione's Patonus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041208193825.DYDN8465.mta10.adelphia.net@steveupstairs> No: HPFGUIDX 119512 Quote: >Hermione's otter patronus has nothing to do with any possable R/Hr >ship(ick). The otter is JKR's favorite animal and that is why it is >Hermione's patronus. Steve here: Well that clears up why Hermione's patronus is an otter. But what about the references to other otter related animals around the Burrow? Steve 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 From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Dec 8 19:47:39 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 19:47:39 -0000 Subject: Sirius & Remus post-Hogwarts (was: Snape and McGonagall) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119513 Carol: > When Sirius left Hogwarts, he was distanced from his own family and > had only the Potters, who had informally adopted him. Then James's > parents died or were murdered, and James himself got married and was > presumably less available for risky adventures than he had been as a > schoolboy. They were no longer inseparable companions, especially > after James became a father as well as a husband. Sirius must have > used the Order as a surrogate Hogwarts, a new source of adventures, > this time for a good cause but also at much greater risk. > > But meantime there seems to have been some sort of distancing > between him and Remus Lupin, a mutual mistrust that probably had > some relation to Lupin's being a werewolf. SSSusan: I was with you up to this point, Carol, but unless I'm misinterpreting what you mean, I disagree with the last statement. I've got nothing firm upon which to base this, other than how quickly Remus & Sirius forgave one another in the shrieking shack, but I really do not believe that any mistrust or distancing on Sirius' part was in relation to Lupin's being a werewolf. Unless by that you mean simply because of his monthly absences they were together less often? But I can't imagine the fact of his being a werewolf having caused Sirius to pull away or to doubt Remus. Carol: > ...to me it's no wonder that Sirius in OoP focuses on his carefree > schooldays, when the worst consequence of his recklessness (in his > mind) was detention (I really don't think he really considered the > potential consequences of the so-called Prank for anyone, including > himself, and particularly not for Remus Lupin). There was nothing > fun about the years that followed: the disintegration of a four-way > friendship, the deadly serious business of being an Order member, > the death of the Potters, his own idiotic mistake in proposing > Peter as Secret Keeper, his rash pursuit of Peter after Godric's > Hollow and the horrible consequences. . . . It makes perfect sense > for Sirius to focus on his schooldays, the only happy time in his > short life. SSSusan: This I agree with. I'm reminded of the Bruce Springsteen song, "Glory Days." An understandable focus on those school years, but still sad that a life didn't get to move onward towards more adult accomplishments and gratifications. Siriusly Snapey Susan From eloiseherisson at aol.com Wed Dec 8 19:52:13 2004 From: eloiseherisson at aol.com (eloise_herisson) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 19:52:13 -0000 Subject: The Philospher's Stone (was: Harry's Protection (was Re: Questions)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119514 Kneasy: > The emphasis has been changed too; originally the concept of the > formulation was solely concentrated on the transmutation of metals, > the immortality bit was a later addition to alchemical thinking. In the > Potterverse JKR seems to put the cart before the horse - it's the > prospect of eternal life that is pre-eminent, recycling baked beans > cans to pay off the mortgage comes in a very distant second. Eloise: I'm glad you mentioned this. Right after I posted my last message, it struck me that there might be another reason for restricting access to the Philosopher's Stone completely unrelated to immortality: since it was also believed to turn base metal into gold, unrestricted access could spell disaster for the wizarding economy. Rather frivolous in the context of immortality and all, but nevertheless.... It also crosses my mind to wonder now whether the Philosopher's Stone has any connection with Harry's parents' wealth, another secret which we've been promised we'll find out about later. Kneasy: > What is evident is that in HP the Stone is supposed to endow > immortality to the *physical* body. This is a key distinction IMO, > squatting as I am behind the ramparts of Possession Theory. Voldy's > spirit/essence/mind did not die at GH, though his body was destroyed > (or so we assume), but without a corporate aspect he becomes almost > powerless, though the 'almost' is important - he's still able to possess > other beings. If he can only slot this essence into a body that has a > user guarantee stretching to eternity - well, he's set for life - and it'll > be a *very* long one, approximately until the heat death of the universe. Eloise: Well, yes, quite. But this was the case before he was ripped from his body too. It's the question I was asking really. Unless we assume that the essence of a person dies at a given point even if the body is immortal, surely all that is needed to achieve bodily immortality is an immortal body, which he could have achieved via the Philosopher's Stone without recourse to whatever else he did. I think a belief in the immortality of the soul is hinted at, both in Dumbledore's own stated philosophy on death and in the concept of the Dementor's Kiss being worse than death itself. If soul sucking result merely in oblivion, then I don't see that it can really be worse than death except for the people who have to deal with the empty shell left behind. It implies a loss of that essence which makes one human and can pass on to another existence. Kneasy: > Of course many fans have wondered about the back-story to > the Flamels, their association with DD and why the hell Voldy > didn't drop round their place one night before GH and beat, > threaten or Legilimise the Stone or the formulation out of them. > That would fit his usual practices, you'd think. It's not as if the > Flamels or old Nick's success were a secret, is it? But no; Voldy > isn't a villain that thinks, no Cassius he. He waits until everything > goes pear-shaped, his dastardly plans dashed, spends 10 years > having a meeting of minds with the local rodentia in some primitive > back-water before coming out for round two. Seems very > providential that he reappears when he does. Or is it providential? Eloise: Well, it could be a bit of the old Evil Overlord syndrome. Kneasy: > Right. This is where Kneasy constructs his own back-story, based > on his reading of characterisation and story arc. > > It wasn't providential at all - DD deliberately lured him out using > the Stone as bait. Much better to tackle Voldy before Voldy is ready > than wait until he is back in full fig and possibly already immortal. Eloise: I can live with that and the rest of your theory, but my problem is why Dumbledore had that opportunity. *Why* hadn't Voldemort already seized bodily immortality via the Stone. Kneasy: . > > The implications of Voldy's rant in the graveyard, where he goes > on about how he almost became immortal, suggest that there are > routes to this end other than the Stone. Eloise: Yes, this is what I deduced too. If there's one magical route, then there's no reason why there shouldn't be another. Perhaps Jen put her finger on it: > In alchemy, the process is equally important (or more > important?) than the end result. As the base metals are purified > into gold, so the apprentice is purified and transformed. It's a > life's work and requires a devoted servant to perfect the process > and move through each level on the way to immortality. > > Presumably Flamel's work would be considered a spiritual > transformation and Voldemort's work was the antithesis of this. Eloise: Perhaps Voldemort would be *incapable* of creating the Philosopher's Stone. Still begs the question of why he didn't try to steal it earlier. Or perhaps he did and we just don't know about it. Kneasy: >Or perhaps it's just that he > thought there were [other routes to immortality]. Certainly nothing has been said about the Stone > being central to his plans before the first book; he travels the world, > learns strange things, yet apparently never finds out that there's this > bloke who's already cracked it. > Very odd. He needs a decent search engine - the one he's got is > too similar to Yahoo!Mort for comfort. Eloise: The problem I outlined exactly. The other explanation is that the kind of immortality granted by the Stone isn't enough: if it grants only bodily immortality, would that prevent (for example) your being soul-sucked by a Dementor? Kneasy: > Unless - and here's a thought - the Flamels don't exist - they're > DD's invention - and so is the Stone - devised to catch Voldy's > attention. It'd certainly explain why there isn't a queue 5 miles long > pointing to the Flamel's front door. Just a throw-away comment on > a Chocolate Frog card, rig an entry in a book in the Hogwarts library, > start a rumour or two and Voldy's hooked. > Or is that a conspiracy theory too far? Eloise: Well, it *is* very strange that Hermione had never heard of Flamel (particularly as he was a real person) although I guess she wouldn't expect him still to be alive. But surely other people would have noticed the reference on the Chocolate Frog card (interesting he didn't have his own, though). Kneasy: > Try another - DD is Nicholas Flamel, reborn/revitalised every > couple of centuries - just like Fawkes. In which case, if we accept > JKR's premises on the need for a top-up of elixir every so often, > and if the Stone has really been destroyed, then DD is on his last > legs. No wonder he's described as tired and old. Eloise: I don't actually believe this, but I don't think it's totally far fetched, either. A little piece of possible corroboration is that Flamel has a wife and JKR was very evasive on the subject of Hogwarts' professors' wives, saying we would find out why later. Making sure that Voldemort is defeated once and for all could also come under the heading of putting his affairs in order as Flamel was supposed to have just enough elixir to do. I'm not sure that (as Jen suggested) his having embraced immortality for some while makes his speeches on the subject of death hypocritical as according to this theory by the end of PS/SS (if not before) he has decided either that immortality isn't all it's cracked up to be, or else that the job with which he was entrusted was coming to an end (I hate to draw the analogy again, but like the knight guarding the Grail). One thing Dumbledore doesn't claim to be is infallible; in saying, "You know, the Stone was really not such a wonderful thing. As much money and life as you could want! The two things most human beings would choose above all - the trouble is, humans do have knack of choosing precisely those things which are worse for them," he could easily be expressing regret at what he himself has done. I'd better stop before I start to believe it. ~Eloise who especially likes Geoff's suggestion that Voldemort might be finally overcome by the ennui of the endless routine of finding things for sycophantic Death Eaters to do. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 8 19:52:59 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 19:52:59 -0000 Subject: Warlock/Wizard - was Asking JKR just one question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119515 Ginger wrote: > > Back to the whole wizard/warlock thing. It struck me that we have > never heard of a young warlock. Young as in underage. Perhaps > wizard is used like we would say "guy" and warlock is used as we > would say "man". There's not much difference at all when speaking of > men, but guys can be any age. > > It would explain how Harry can easily detect them (duh, they're > adults) and how the descriptions vary so much. Carol responds: And yet we never hear Snape or Lupin or Black or even Flitwick referred to as warlocks. It must be something other than adult males. Certainly Pippin is on the right track that "warlock" is an older word for "wizard" (I think that it's male only and parallel to "witch"). But if "warlock" applies mostly to older wizards like Perkins (or titles of positions once held primarily by men, though the history of Hogwarts suggests a level of sexual equality in conflict with this idea), then the "rowdy warlocks" must be old men behaving like boys. Carol, who thinks that "guy" refers mostly to teenage males who are too young to be called men but think they're too old to be called boys From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 8 20:40:24 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 20:40:24 -0000 Subject: Is Snape really THAT good in Potions?(was: Snape and the Kappa) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119516 Siriusly Snapey Susan wrote: > > I think Potions *Master* IS an important term to take into consideration when evaluating Snape's abilities. We don't hear > > anyone refer to Flitwick as the Charms Master, nor McGonagall as the Transfiguration Master. Now, I can't speak to whether "Master" would be a both-gender appellation, but we do have the example of Flitwick. He's always teacher or professor; not master. Don't you think we're *meant* to take from that information that Snape *is* considered an expert? > > > > Siriusly Snapey Susan, who doesn't believe Snape is a master *teacher* but does believe he's a master potions maker. > Potioncat responded: > I think you're right, no one calls Flitwick the Charms Master. But Potions Master still means Potions teacher. And when Snape tries to uncover the purpose of Harry's spare bit of parchment, he refers to himself as a master of Hogwarts (a teacher of Hogwarts)(Sorry, I don't have the exact quote.) > > JKR was of course, writing for an English public at first and would ahve expected master to be understood as teacher, even if it isn't used today. Here is where SSSusan gave me an idea: It could be that JKR is using Potion Master as Potion Teacher but is also implying or will reveal a stronger meaning of the word. But I don't think there is a profession in the WW of Potion Masters outside of the school setting. Carol adds: The term is also used in "headmaster" and "deputy headmistress," which suggests that there is a sexual distinction, at least in form if not in meaning. McGonagall should be referred to as the Transfiguration Mistress (and Flitwick as the Charms Master) if "master"/mistress" is the exact equivalent of "teacher." If it were only Snape referring to himself as Potions Master, we might think that he was trying to make his rank or competence appear greater than it really is. But he's consistently referred to by that title in a variety of contexts, the first being, IIRC, the title of the chapter in SS/PS depicting Harry's first Potions class. It's possible that the title reflects his surprisingly senior position at Hogwarts for so young a teacher ("master" suggesting a connection with "headmaster" and "deputy headmistress"). We've seen that he's Dumbledore's righthand man, very close in importance to McGonagall (and also, like her, a head of house). He seems to have *more* authority in general school affairs than either Flitwick or Sprout, neither of whom is around when Dumbledore, MM, and SS confront Crouch!Moody and neither of whom prowls the halls to keep Harry and other "troublemakers" in line. And not only Sprout and Flitwick but McGonagall as well follow his lead in sending Lockhart from the staff room to save Ginny (or flee the school). And yet the title "Potions Master" seems to refer to his post as Potions teacher, as indicated by its use in the chapter title and the word "Potions" itself in conjunction with "Master." Would *any* (male) Potions teacher have the designation "Master" when it doesn't seem to be used for other subjects, or is it peculiar to Snape? I tend to think that it reflects both his position in the school and his extensive knowledge of his subject, but I really can't prove that. How about adding the question to our list of what to ask JKR: Why is Snape referred to as the Potions Master when no other teacher has a similar title? Carol, wondering why she has two spoons on the saucer beneath her coffee cup From R.Vink2 at chello.nl Wed Dec 8 20:53:49 2004 From: R.Vink2 at chello.nl (Renee) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 20:53:49 -0000 Subject: Sirius & Remus post-Hogwarts (was: Snape and McGonagall) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119517 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > > Carol: > > When Sirius left Hogwarts, he was distanced from his own family and > > had only the Potters, who had informally adopted him. Then James's > > parents died or were murdered, and James himself got married and was > > presumably less available for risky adventures than he had been as a > > schoolboy. They were no longer inseparable companions, especially > > after James became a father as well as a husband. Sirius must have > > used the Order as a surrogate Hogwarts, a new source of adventures, > > this time for a good cause but also at much greater risk. > > > > But meantime there seems to have been some sort of distancing > > between him and Remus Lupin, a mutual mistrust that probably had > > some relation to Lupin's being a werewolf. > > > SSSusan: > I was with you up to this point, Carol, but unless I'm > misinterpreting what you mean, I disagree with the last statement. > I've got nothing firm upon which to base this, other than how quickly > Remus & Sirius forgave one another in the shrieking shack, but I > really do not believe that any mistrust or distancing on Sirius' part > was in relation to Lupin's being a werewolf. Unless by that you mean > simply because of his monthly absences they were together less > often? But I can't imagine the fact of his being a werewolf having > caused Sirius to pull away or to doubt Remus. > Renee: Well, I can see how it could have happened. At Hogwarts, the four friends were protected, there was no immediate external threat and being Animagi James, Sirus and Peter had nothing to fear from Remus. After they left school and the war with Voldemort became a reality, this changed. We're told Voldemort was recruiting all kinds of Dark Creatures. If the four drifted apart, as seems to be the case, suspicion could have taken root. Probably it wasn't so much Werewolf! Remus as DarkCreature!Remus, a potential Voldemort supporter, who was the object of this suspicion. There's another factor, though I may be going out on a limb here. The Prank could have ended in disaster for Remus, too, and even if Sirius didn't realise this, I'd be surprised if no one pointed it out to him. I'm not saying Remus must have been furious (improbable, given his need to be liked) and/or Sirius must have felt terribly guilty, but things can't have been as easy between them as they used to be. Maybe an element of inequality crept in - and the balance wasn't in Sirius's favour. Suspecting Remus would even it out, not as a conscious decision on Sirius's part, but as the result of a subconscious wish. Especially if he never properly apologised, and his attitude in the Shrieking Shack makes me doubt he did. Of course, if we hear that James and Lily also suspected Remus, this second interpretation becomes invalid. Renee From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Wed Dec 8 21:14:28 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 13:14:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Sirius & Remus post-Hogwarts (was: Snape and McGonagall) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041208211428.65410.qmail@web53109.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119518 --- Renee wrote: > The Prank could have ended in disaster for Remus, too, and even if > Sirius didn't realise this, I'd be surprised if no one pointed it > out to him. I'm not saying Remus must have been furious > (improbable, > given his need to be liked) and/or Sirius must have felt terribly > guilty, but things can't have been as easy between them as they > used > to be. Maybe an element of inequality crept in - and the balance > wasn't in Sirius's favour. Suspecting Remus would even it out, not > as a conscious decision on Sirius's part, but as the result of a > subconscious wish. Especially if he never properly apologised, and > his attitude in the Shrieking Shack makes me doubt he did. > Of course, if we hear that James and Lily also suspected Remus, > this second interpretation becomes invalid. I think this is quite likely, Renee. My personal view is that Remus felt that the Prank was really something above and beyond the normal intercourse between them, and I think Sirius did feel personally guilty which is not a comfortable or welcome emotion, especially when (outwardly) they'd made things up. But there are two other changes that might also explain why the drifting apart wasn't halted: 1. James' attention was divided between hanging out with the gang and seeing more of Lily. So he might have missed little signs that things were wrong because he was distracted with new developments in his life, and 2. Peter was in there, fomenting dissent between Sirius and Remus. And I'll bet he was so subtle about it that they didn't realize it was happening. A few comments in the right time and place ("Gee Sirius, I wonder why Remus wasn't at home last night. Didn't he say he would be? Wonder where he was?" or "Gee, Remus, isn't it great that Sirius and James are such great guys? I mean, still friends even though you're a werewolf and more people know it now cause you're applying for jobs and they don't care what people think!") and both Sirius and Remus might start wondering about the other. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 8 21:29:59 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 21:29:59 -0000 Subject: Sirius & Remus post-Hogwarts (was: Snape and McGonagall) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119520 SSSusan: > snip. I've got nothing firm upon which to base this, other than how quickly Remus & Sirius forgave one another in the shrieking shack, but I really do not believe that any mistrust or distancing on Sirius' part was in relation to Lupin's being a werewolf. Unless by that you mean simply because of his monthly absences they were together less often? But I can't imagine the fact of his being a werewolf having caused Sirius to pull away or to doubt Remus. Alla: Yes, since Sirius accepted Remus for who he is in Hogwarts, I also doubt that he suddenly started distrusting him AFTER Hogwarts for the reason of Remus being a werewolf. My SPECULATION is that either Remus was somehow involved with shady people on order business and Sirius saw it and misinterpreted OR as Magda said that Peter took hand in creating atmopshere of general mistrust between them somehow. From willsonkmom at msn.com Wed Dec 8 21:32:36 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 21:32:36 -0000 Subject: Hermione's Patonus In-Reply-To: <20041208193825.DYDN8465.mta10.adelphia.net@steveupstairs> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119521 > Steve here: > Well that clears up why Hermione's patronus is an otter. But what about the > references to other otter related animals around the Burrow? > > Steve > > Potioncat: Aren't ferrets part of the otter/weasel family? Potioncat From stevejjen at earthlink.net Wed Dec 8 21:35:19 2004 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 21:35:19 -0000 Subject: The Philospher's Stone (was: Harry's Protection (was Re: Questions)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119522 > Kneasy: > > What is evident is that in HP the Stone is supposed to endow > > immortality to the *physical* body. This is a key distinction > > IMO, squatting as I am behind the ramparts of Possession Theory. > > Voldy's spirit/essence/mind did not die at GH, though his body > > was destroyed (or so we assume), but without a corporate aspect > > he becomes almost powerless, though the 'almost' is important - > > he's still able to possess other beings. Eloise: > Well, yes, quite. But this was the case before he was ripped from > his body too. It's the question I was asking really. Unless we > assume that the essence of a person dies at a given point even if > the body is immortal, surely all that is needed to achieve bodily > immortality is an immortal body, which he could have achieved via > the Philosopher's Stone without recourse to whatever else he did. Jen: Voldemort tells us in GOF: "...I, who have gone further than anybody along the path that leads to immortality. You know my goal-- to conquer death." (US, chap. 33, p. 653). He doesn't seem aware of Flamel, or discounts his work at any rate. Either way he considers the PS a last resort. Maybe Voldemort feared some lingering goodness would be conveyed by the immortality of the PS, unlike his own experiements. Or it was simply his pride prior to the first book--he was going to achieve immortality in a *destructive* way rather than through the purity of the Stone (even a stolen stone). > Eloise: > The other explanation is that the > kind of immortality granted by the Stone isn't enough: if it grants > only bodily immortality, would that prevent (for example) your being > soul-sucked by a Dementor? Jen: Now there's an interesting thought. Actually, bodily immortality is sounding ifinitely less appealing when you consider the possibility that immortality of the body doesn't convey freedom from mental or emotional pain. Who wants to endure lifetimes of that? But that worry isn't high on Voldemort's list. Maybe his pursuit of immortality involved the extinguishment of all human feelings as well (except rage, apparently ). Eloise: > I'm not sure that (as Jen suggested) his having embraced > immortality for some while makes his speeches on the subject of > death hypocritical as according to this theory by the end of > PS/SS (if not before) he has decided either that immortality isn't > all it's cracked up to be, or else that the job with which he was > entrusted was coming to an end (I hate to draw the analogy again, > but like the knight guarding the Grail). One thing Dumbledore > doesn't claim to be is infallible; in saying, > >"You know, the Stone was really not such a wonderful thing. As much > money and life as you could want! The two things most human beings > would choose above all - the trouble is, humans do have knack of > choosing precisely those things which are worse for them," He > could easily be expressing regret at what he himself has done. Jen: Yes, I was re-thinking this one myself. Except if Flamel was a real person, someone or some book would have a picture of him and put two-and-two together. (Or not, if it servs JKR's purposes, I guess.) But as for Dumbledore's speeches about death. I'm thinking now it's possible Dumbledore's words would mean quite a lot coming from a guy who actually embraced immortality and found it lacking. A guy like that might change his mind over a few hundred years, growing to believe in death as the "next great adventure" rather than a fearful event. It wouldn't necessarily sound hypocritical in that light. Jen From drednort at alphalink.com.au Wed Dec 8 21:42:32 2004 From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 08:42:32 +1100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Is Snape really THAT good in Potions?(was: Snape and the Kappa) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <41B80FF8.21298.2F3DEAB@localhost> No: HPFGUIDX 119523 On 8 Dec 2004 at 16:07, potioncat wrote: > I think you're right, no one calls Flitwick the Charms Master. But > Potions Master still means Potions teacher. And when Snape tries to > uncover the purpose of Harry's spare bit of parchment, he refers to > himself as a master of Hogwarts (a teacher of Hogwarts)(Sorry, I > don't have the exact quote.) "Professor Severus Snape, master of this school, commands you to yield the information you conceal!" Just a brief comment. First of all I am just going to quote from my big essay discussing Hogwarts in the context of the British Public Schools. "By longstanding tradition, teachers in public schools are generally referred to as school masters or school mistresses, rather than mere teachers (Walford, 1984, p.115). While at Hogwarts, the more generic term seems to be in common use, the term master still appears to be used occasionally as seen in the above quote, and it survives as part of the terms Headmaster, Headmistress, and similar terms. "The appointment of teachers at Hogwarts seems to be virtually entirely in the hands of the Headmaster - at least under normal circumstances in the absence of unusual Educational Decrees (Rowling, J.K. 2003, p.275). Historically this matches the practice of the public schools where appointments were generally largely in the hands of the Headmaster of the day (Gathorne-Hardy, 1977, p.190). "It is worth considering here, how Headmasters tended to make their decisions as to the appointment of staff members. Many readers might think it is obvious that certain Hogwarts teachers have had no formalized training as teachers. Historically speaking, this was quite common for public school teachers. Public school masters were regarded as professionals with knowledge based on a theoretical and esoteric knowledge within specific subject areas. Most public school teachers had no formalized teaching qualifications, instead relying on higher degrees (stereotypically a Master of Arts degree from Oxford or Cambridge) to prove they understood their subject (Walford, 1984, p.116). Large numbers of public school masters were themselves the product of public schools (Bamford, 1967, p.121) - something that seems likely to be the case for Hogwarts, if for no other reason, than there does not appear to be any other opportunities for people to acquire the education they need to become qualified in their specialist subjects. "Specific skills as a teacher, rather than mere knowledge of the subject being taught, were regarded as non-essential, though valuable if they were present. It was, more or less, assumed that pupils would learn if the teacher knew his subject." Now, the above quotes represent the real historical situation as it applied in the British Public (public broadly speaking meaning 'private' in US terms) Schools - which Hogwarts seems to be a rather odd example of. And I think it may have some implications here. The Wizarding World doesn't seem to be over-credentialled. As far as we know there is no university level studies and therefore we have no reason to suppose that they have a Degree structure - but nonetheless it still seems likely that some people are considered more qualified than others. Perhaps most teachers at Hogwarts are qualified at something equivalent to a 'Bachelors' level in our terms. But a few may be qualified at a 'Master' level - just as the stereotypical British Public School teacher was an MA. Or perhaps teaching is seen on the continuum of a craft system - most teachers are Journeyman, a few are Masters. There may be a reason why only some teachers are Masters at Hogwarts. Most may not be, because their subjects may not require them. Also useages change over time - and this is dependent on schools to a great extent. I attended a school that was run rather closely on the lines of a British Public School (even though it was in Australia) in the late 1980s and early 1990s, and we tended to use the term 'teacher' most of the time. Unless we were being formal, or talking about a person's specific 'Titles' in the school heirarchy. We were using the term 'teacher' not because it was particularly correct (though there was nothing wrong with it) but because it was the term used in wider society outside the school - the term most of us had grown up using and had used in our education prior to coming to the school in question (the youngest anyone entered this school - actually one of its two prep schools - was at 10, quite a number entered at 12, or 14 - so most had a lot of time in more 'modern' or 'mainstream' schools. Kids are coming to Hogwarts at 11. How they are educated before that is largely unknown (except for Muggles who presumably normally attended Muggle schools). The kids seem to speak normal modern English. They are quite likely it seems to come to the school speaking (for want of a better term) 'regular English c1991'. The term teacher is probably the generic term in their normal discussions simply for this reason - even though the more formal, somewhat archaic term is probably completely readily understood. That's how it was for us - we used the teacher most of the time (the longer we spent in the school, the less common that seemed to become actually - but I think it still stayed the majority term, just less significantly). But certain teachers would refer to themselves as Masters most of the time - and *all* the time if they were referring to a specific position. I get the real impression in the quote: "Professor Severus Snape, master of this school, commands you to yield the information you conceal!" that Snape is seriously emphasising his place in the school - so perhaps he uses the correct, formal term, even if it is somewhat archaic at Hogwarts by that time. He may need to use it as he almost seems to be invoking it as a term of power - not quite a spell perhaps, but something almost akin to that. 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 ibotsjfvxfst at yahoo.co.uk Wed Dec 8 21:55:12 2004 From: ibotsjfvxfst at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?Hans=20Andr=E9a?=) Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 21:55:12 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Books 6 & 7 - Post 106899 revised Message-ID: <20041208215512.38338.qmail@web25101.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119524 I hope I may be permitted to have some fun with more predictions for books 6 & 7. I'd like to revise and add to the ones I made in Post 106899. I got criticised for not explaining how I worked out my percentages of probability. There's nothing mathematical about it. 99% means hardly any doubt, 90% means fairly certain, etc. I'm just a gambler! 1. Harry will liberate his emotional I in book 6. 100% 2. Harry will liberate his consciousness I in book seven. 100% 3. Harry will pass through the Gate of Saturn in book seven. 100% 4a. Ron will die but will live again through the alchemical process. 90% 4b. Hermione will die but will live again through the alchemical process 50% 5. Harry will enter the Temple of Venus (the Room with the mysterious force in the Ministry of Magic). 99% 6. Harry will take Hagrid's place at the end of book 7. 75% 7. Harry will not have to kill Voldemort by a deliberate act. 100% 8. Voldemort will dissipate like an expired Patronus through an act of love by Harry. 99% 9. Harry and Sirius will be reunited. 100% 10. Snape will die for Harry or the trio. 99% 11. Lupin will die for Harry or the trio. 99% 12. In book 6 or 7 a "counsellor" will teach about "sin, righteousness and judgement". 90% 13. Dobby will accompany Harry on his final hero's journey. 90% 1. Harry will liberate his emotional I in book 6. We are now 5/7 through the journey. So far the story has followed EXACTLY the 7 steps of liberation as symbolised in the Alchemical Wedding of Christian Rosycross in the ascent of the 9 candidates of the seven floors in the Tower of Olympus. In post 55793 in April 2003 I predicted, on this basis, that Harry would liberate his mental I in book 5. This is exactly what happened. Voldemort was driven out of Harry's mind by his love for Sirius. Jo has already stated that in book 6 Harry will need to control his emotions. This I think is a clue in that direction. 2. Harry will liberate his consciousness I in book seven. The same reason as for No. 1. I will just explain what I mean by the threefold I. The mental I is obviously situated in the head and is the voice of reason that speaks to the central consciousness. The emotional I is the voice of the heart that speaks to the central consciousness. The consciousness I is the central consciousness situated just behind the forehead between the eyebrows. Going through life we are constantly appealed to by the head and the heart, and the central consciousness makes the choice of which voice to listen to. Some people listen more to the voice of the head, others to the voice of the heart, and others again spend their lives listening to both and living in inner conflict. When our Voldemort is driven out of our head it means our head is free from evil and so the voice of reason will be pure and unselfish. When he is driven from the heart this means no feelings of selfishness will ever speak to us again. When the consciousness I is liberated from Voldemort it is set free from all the restrictions of time and space. It is reborn as an omniscient consciousness linked always to the great Architect of the Universe. There is no separation between Him and Man, and this consciousness is a progress from unimaginable glory to ever intenser, ever more sublime, ever more rapturous, totally selfless glory. In Buddhism this is called the enlightenment. In Christianity it is the moment the dove lands on Jesus after his baptism by John. In the Corpus Hermeticum this is the voice of Pymander speaking to Hermes. The Rosicrucians call it the Mercury Initiation. In Revelation it's the vision of John. 3. Harry will pass through the Gate of Saturn in book seven. Before the new consciousness can be born the old one has to "die". This is not a real death in the sense that there is a gap between the old and the new consciousness. The old three-dimensional consciousness is swallowed up by the new, as it were. Death is swallowed up by victory. A candle flame merges into the sun. The flame has died yet lives on forever in the mighty radiations of the sun. Harry will pass though the archway with the veil and return victorious. I think it is possible that he will pass though "hell", as did Jesus after the crucifixion. I'd give that one 90%. I feel quite certain that Harry's reason for going through the veil will be to meet up with Sirius. I will explain this when I go through the discussion of each character. In the Alchemical Wedding the Gate of Saturn is symbolised by the secret eighth floor of the Tower of Olympus. The Gate of Saturn is associated with the number 8. Christian Rosycross is invited to come up to the eighth floor, under the roof, to assist in the rebirth of the new king and queen. (In this reckoning the ground floor is the first floor.) 4a. Ron will die but will live again through the alchemical process. I tend to think he will die by decapitation, perhaps in a symbolic sense. Decapitation plays in important role in the Alchemical Wedding, in the New Testament (John the Baptist) and in Harry Potter (Buckbeak, parrot & herring). In the Alchemical Wedding the prince and princess are decapitated along with 4 other kings and queens and their bodies, together with the head of the executioner, used in a process of dissolution, crystallisation, rebirth, another decapitation, burning and another rebirth, to create two new bodies of unsurpassable beauty. I think that somehow Ron will live again after Harry's return through the Gate of Saturn. I suspect the statement "those that love us never truly leave us" is a clue. Perhaps Harry Ron and Hermione together form a Half Blood Prince, though whether that's the one meant by the title of book 6 I don't know. 4b. I originally thought Hermione would meet the same fate but I'm not so sure about her any more. There are signs that she will and signs that she won't. I'll leave it 50/50 5. Harry will enter the Temple of Venus (the Room with the mysterious force in the Ministry of Magic). Just like Christian Rosycross Harry will enter the forbidden room. I suspect he will find Lily there. I envisage a scenario like this: When the Ministry of Magic went to the Potters' house on 31-10-81 (or the day after) they found James and Lily there. The Department of Mysteries wanted Lily's body to study Love, reasoning that if she had so much love for Harry that it just about killed Voldemort, it must have been extremely powerful. They have put her body on a bier of some sort and it's preserved either by magic or by the power of Love itself. My reason for thinking this is as follows: As this story is very similar the "The Alchemical Wedding of Christian Rosycross" there could quite possibly be a woman in the room in the Dept. of Mysteries. There has to be something there; I doubt you could just have an empty room with a force field. There has to be a focus. Another even more powerful reason is that both Lily and the Room of Venus symbolise the divine principle in the human heart. They are in fact the same. Lily is the principle in its pristine state while the Temple of Venus is the same principle in a state of partial realisation of its potential. When Dumbledore says this room has a force that Harry has in great abundance he may be referring to a link between Harry and the Room, which could contain the body of his mother. I know Jo has said Lily is definitely dead, otherwise I would have said she was in a state of suspended animation, like Venus in the "Alchemical Wedding". Intriguing! I suspect that Harry will be 'punished' like Christian Rosycross who saw Venus lying asleep on a bed. His page lifted the blankets and Christian Rosycross saw her naked. The gatekeeper through astrological observation became aware of this and at the end of the story he accused Christian Rosycross of it. Christian Rosycross was punished by having to become gatekeeper, although "coming home". This is a mysterious part of the AW. If we take this literally it sounds like seeing "Love" is a crime punishable by a kind of house arrest. However we should keep in mind that this is divine humour. The cloakship of gatekeeper is accepted voluntarily. The idea of "punishment" just draws our attention to the inconceivably great sacrifice made by a Master of Compassion when he is faced with two choices: return home to the loving arms of the Father or stay behind in the fallen universe to lead seekers to the homeward journey. Of course compassion wins! Who, who's heart is liberated from Voldemort, would not choose to stay behind and guide his prodigal brothers and sisters to Platform 9 to enable them to begin the 7 years' journey to liberation from suffering and death? Harry may be confronted with the choice of being with Sirius or coming to the muggle world to become gate keeper at Hogwarts. If he chooses the latter, he will be with Sirius anyway. That's my (flawed) understanding of how it works on the Path of Liberation This takes us to: 6. Harry will take Hagrid's place at the end of book seven. Hagrid is the Keeper of the Keys and was the one who introduced Harry to the Magical World. Hagrid is officially regarded as a muggle, as his wand has been broken, and he acts as a gatekeeper between the muggle world and the magic world. He gave Harry the letter of invitation and gave him access to platform 9. He also took Harry into Diagon Alley. As a punishment (implicitly or explicitly) Harry will take Hagrid's place after his defeat of Voldemort, the death of his friends and all the exciting adventures of the past seven years. I guess it's a kind of anticlimax, but how symmetrical, how ironic, and yet how sublime. The greatest of them all, he who defeated the Dark Lord, is rewarded with the humblest job of all. The Alchemical Wedding ends with the announcement that two pages are missing, "...and he, the author hereof, whereas he imagined he must be guardian of the gate in the morning, has come home." As Harry has always considered Hogwarts his real home this will be poignantly true for him. He, too, may be forbidden to do magic. I can imagine it now: "First years this way!", Harry bellowed, as the new students gaped at his scar.... What will happen to Hagrid? He will obviously resume the journey that was interrupted previously. It's obvious that his progress as a wizard was hindered by being gatekeeper. This points to the sacrifice made by those who take on this role. Hagrid will probably be pardoned by the Ministry of Magic and so be allowed to do magic. 7. Harry will not have to kill Voldemort by a deliberate act. I have covered this in my essay. A person whose heart is liberated is just not capable of killing. It's just not possible. No way, no option, can't do, sorry. What happens when evil confronts Good is that Good does not enter into conflict. It steps back and fills the vacated space with Love. That's a force, not a warm fuzzy feeling. As we know, Voldemort can't stand this force and whatever part of him is evil will simply dissipate, hence: 8. Voldemort will dissipate like an expired Patronus through an act of love or compassion by Harry. 9. Harry and Sirius will be reunited. 100% Sirius is the "bright morning star" (of ancient Egypt), and if you look that up in the Bible (Revelation) you WILL know. What amuses me is that Jo has said that she chose a name for her son which has nothing to do with Harry Potter. Ha ha ha! See revelation 22:16!! By the way, Sirius is identified by some people as the Star of David. 10. Snape will die for Harry. 99% 11. Lupin will die for Harry. 99% I think I've identified Snape and Lupin as the 'black' and 'grey' kings of "The Alchemical Wedding" respectively. They both sacrifice themselves for the resurrection of the new king and queen. They are both decapitated. 12. In book 6 a "counsellor" will come to teach about "sin, righteousness and judgement". 90% Read John 16:8. This is a key passage, in my opinion, to understanding the very foundation of Harry Potter, the axis on which it all turns. The above character could also be the Half-Blood Prince. However I'm still suspicious about why Harry, Ron and Hermione are undeviatingly mentioned in that order, spelling H.R.H. = His Royal Highness, plus the fact that their "wizard blood" adds up to 1 out of 3, being "half-blood". I'm 50/50 on that subject. 13. Dobby will accompany Harry on his final hero's journey. Dobby personifies the etheric body of the alchemist who has the new soul, i.e. Harry. Harry has liberated Dobby (reverse the consonants and you get bbody) which means that the etheric body is able to do wonderful things for the new soul. It becomes a powerful spiritual ("magic") tool. I believe Dobby will freely accompany Harry on his last journey, possibly the one through the gate of Saturn, and will in fact become Harry's assistant. If Harry takes Hagrid's place at Hogwarts Dobby will go with him there. Well that's it for the time being. You all have my permission to laugh if I'm proven wrong! It's still been fun to predict this. What I'm 100% certain about is this: Harry Potter is the universal message of human liberation - the death of the earthly, mortal self and the resurrection of the original, divine everlasting Son of the Architect. 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 dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 8 22:02:03 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 22:02:03 -0000 Subject: The Philospher's Stone (was: Harry's Protection (was Re: Questions)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119525 > Jen: Now there's an interesting thought. Actually, bodily immortality is sounding ifinitely less appealing when you consider the possibility that immortality of the body doesn't convey freedom from mental or emotional pain. Who wants to endure lifetimes of that? But that worry isn't high on Voldemort's list. Maybe his pursuit of immortality involved the extinguishment of all human feelings as well (except rage, apparently ). Alla: I love this discussion. Just a brief comment, Jen. I think that it is possible that in his pursuit of immortality Voldemort wanted to extinguish some human feelings, not all of them. I can easily imagine that he wanted to get rid of feeling pain, but got more than he bargained for. I don't know - maybe he lost the ability to feel anything positive in process. From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Wed Dec 8 22:10:34 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 22:10:34 -0000 Subject: Is Snape really THAT good in Potions?(was: Snape and the Kappa) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119526 > > Potioncat: > In the real world kids get enough chemistry to have an idea of what > it is. In the WW, very young kids are making potions that shrink a > frog into a tadpole. I can't think of any RW comparison to that. > Every student leaves Hogwarts knowing how to make certain potions. > Not every student studies N.E.W.T. level Potions nor do all of > those pass the exams. > > So most could make a potion to cure warts, not everyone could make > Wolfsbane. If Lupin is being honest, perhaps not every N.E.W.T. > level wizard could make it, even with the instructions. > > I have to admit, Pippin has influenced me enough that I wonder if > Lupin is telling the truth about his own ability at potions. But we > don't know if he passed Potion O.W.L.s or if he took the N.E.W.T. > level Potions class. > Neri: If I remember my canon right, the little of what we know about Lupin's brewing abilities comes from the same passage in PoA that (I still maintain, in the absence of counter-examples) is our sole direct canon for Snape's brewing abilities. In this passage Lupin tells Harry (paraphrasing from memory): "I was never much of a potion- brewer and this potion [the wolfsbane] is particularly complex". Note that he doesn't literally say "I can't brew this potion" or "I didn't do NEWT potions". I remind you that we are talking about the same Lupin who told Harry "I do not pretend to be an expert on Dementors". Note also that in this scene, as in many other scenes, Lupin is a master of evasive understatement ("I was a bit off-color"). He has an obvious agenda in this little talk with Harry: stress how much Snape is helpful and trusted. Would it be out-of-character for Lupin to exaggerate Snape's brewing skill a bit on the expense of his own skill? Both skills aren't corroborated by any other character. Both skills are never demonstrated on page. It is reasonable to suppose that Lupin completed a Potions NEWT with a good grade: he is intelligent, was probably a good student (a prefect and a "good boy" who started studying for the Transfiguration OWL minutes after getting out of the DADA exam) and he had a strong study group. He also has the disposition for Potions: quiet, patient, subtle and motivated. In fact, in the Pensive scene 15 yrs old Remus seems to be more patient and subtle than 15 yrs old Severus. For all we know, he could have got a better grade in his Potions NEWT than Snape did. Even if Lupin isn't "much of a potion brewer", he has very good reasons to make an exception and invest a lot of effort in learning how to brew the Wolfsbane Potion. He cannot always rely on expert Potions Masters brewing it for him. The price is likely to be high and he doesn't appear to be wealthy. He is a member of an outcast minority and might not want to reveal what he is in every new place he arrives at. He is also a member of an underground organization that at times was on the run from both DEs and the Ministry. If indeed only a small number of potions masters can brew the Wolfsbane Potion, and Lupin must get his potion every month from one of them, this means that it would be very easy to track Lupin down, no matter how well he is hiding. In the muggle world there are some drug addicts who have learned a complex process of growing and distilling their own drugs in order to be independent of drug dealers and avoid the police. I can see Lupin doing the same thing. Neri From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 8 22:13:53 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 22:13:53 -0000 Subject: Sirius & Remus post-Hogwarts (was: Snape and McGonagall) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119527 Carol earlier: > > But meantime there seems to have been some sort of distancing between him and Remus Lupin, a mutual mistrust that probably had some relation to Lupin's being a werewolf. > Siriusly Snapey Susan responded: > I was with you up to this point, Carol, but unless I'm misinterpreting what you mean, I disagree with the last statement. > I've got nothing firm upon which to base this, other than how quickly Remus & Sirius forgave one another in the shrieking shack, but I really do not believe that any mistrust or distancing on Sirius' part was in relation to Lupin's being a werewolf. Unless by that you mean simply because of his monthly absences they were together less often? But I can't imagine the fact of his being a werewolf having caused Sirius to pull away or to doubt Remus. Carol responds: I should have said "possibly" rather than "probably." I was thinking of previous discussion on this list relating to Voldemort's attempting to recruit goblins, giants, and other alienated groups, which may well have included werewolves. So instead of being their dangerous once-a-month playmate, he could have become an object of suspicion. His identity as Remus Lupin, the quiet, studious boy who never asserted his authority as prefect, might have given way to the view of him as a werewolf, not a monster or even a part-human but a member of a disadvantaged group being recruited by the DEs. It's like Ron's sudden realization that Hermione is a girl, but not at all funny. So while Lupin probably felt distanced from the former companions who had once transformed themselves into animals to run with him at the full moon but now lived very different lives from his, not sharing his poverty or his struggle to support himself or the prejudice he faced, Lupin would, being Lupin, have felt reluctant to express his feelings to the others, especially if they involved any degree of jealousy or resentment. If so, Sirius and the others might have noticed the change in him and attributed it to something worse than its real cause, e.g., a temptation to desert the Order and join Voldemort as other werewolves had (probably) done. Clearly James and Sirius suspected him of being the traitor later on, and that suspicion had to have some sort of basis, something more than James's unwillingness to distrust Sirius or the supposed impossibility that the traitor could be Peter. It must have originated in some change in behavior by Remus himself, which was misunderstood by the others. Also, the suspicion was in place as early as Harry's baptism, fifteen months before Godric's Hollow, at which Lupin was conspicuously not present, even as a witness. So I'm guessing that James's and Sirius's mutual suspicion of Remus, whether or not they sensed the alienation he must inevitably have felt under the circumstances, is somehow related to the one thing that made him conspicuously and irrevocably different from them, his being a werewolf. His poverty, which also made him different, was caused by his being a werewolf. That condition in essence ruled Lupin's life. (It does not, IMO, make him a tragic character since it's not a flaw in his character and we don't yet know his fate, but it makes him a sympathetic one despite his personal weaknesses.) I also think that Lupin's habitual tendency to secretiveness, which we see very clearly in PoA and again in the Pensieve scene in OoP, may have played a role in the misunderstanding. He kept his feelings to himself and paid the penalty. At any rate, I see a wedge driven between Sirius and Remus and between Sirius and James during the years following Hogwarts that resulted in Remus's exclusion from Harry's baptism. Other possible causes include innuendoes from Peter about Remus's untrustworthiness (which might well bring in the werewolf factor) or jealousy of James's continuing closeness to Sirius even after James's marriage, which may have affected his behavior toward them. But I don't think those things are as important as his being a werewolf in making him a target of their suspicion. I'm speculating on possible causes for that separation. I'd welcome other speculations as well. We don't have much canon to base them on, but we do have a pretty good idea of the character traits for at least two of the young men involved, Sirius and Remus. And given Sirius's arrogance toward Remus in the Pensieve scene, I think it's highly unlikely that Remus would confide in him or that Sirius would reflect thoughtfully on the changes he saw in Remus and ask him what was wrong. Or am I misreading both of them? Carol, noting that she mistyped Voldemort as "Voledmort" in the subject heading for another thread and hoping that someone responding to her post will correct the error From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Dec 8 22:47:20 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 22:47:20 -0000 Subject: Sirius & Remus post-Hogwarts (was: Snape and McGonagall) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119528 Carol earlier: >>> But meantime there seems to have been some sort of distancing between him and Remus Lupin, a mutual mistrust that probably had some relation to Lupin's being a werewolf. <<< Siriusly Snapey Susan responded: >> I was with you up to this point, Carol, but unless I'm misinterpreting what you mean, I disagree with the last statement. I've got nothing firm upon which to base this, other than how quickly Remus & Sirius forgave one another in the shrieking shack, but I really do not believe that any mistrust or distancing on Sirius' part was in relation to Lupin's being a werewolf. Unless by that you mean simply because of his monthly absences they were together less often? But I can't imagine the fact of his being a werewolf having caused Sirius to pull away or to doubt Remus. << Carol responds: > I should have said "possibly" rather than "probably." I was > thinking of previous discussion on this list relating to > Voldemort's attempting to recruit goblins, giants, and other > alienated groups, which may well have included werewolves. So > instead of being their dangerous once-a-month playmate, he could > have become an object of suspicion. > His identity as Remus Lupin, the quiet, studious boy who never > asserted his authority as prefect, might have given way to the > view of him as a werewolf, not a monster or even a part-human but > a member of a disadvantaged group being recruited by the DEs. It's > like Ron's sudden realization that Hermione is a girl, but not at > all funny. > Clearly James and Sirius suspected him of being the traitor later > on, and that suspicion had to have some sort of basis, something > more than James's unwillingness to distrust Sirius or the supposed > impossibility that the traitor could be Peter. SSSusan: Like that parallel to Ron noticing Hermione. :-) I guess I keep thinking about how incredibly close they all were. James, Sirius & Peter learned to be animagi FOR Remus. They risked a lot to show him their true & abiding friendship. It is canon that *something* [or things] happened to cause James & Sirius to have doubts about Remus, and I suppose it could be tied into Voldy's recruiting "dark creatures," but I'm just having a very hard time imagining that. I tend to lean towards some event having happened which, as I believe Magda suggested, *could* have been viewed in a negative light if not checked out or that someone [Peter??] could have spun in a negative light. I can't imagine these friends who were *so* close [not just people who attended day school together and got to know each other a bit, but who lived together, transformed together, and had this incredible trust built up] just beginning to doubt Remus because they suspected his reticence meant he was being courted by Voldy & was considering it. It just doesn't register with me. What DID happen to cause James & Sirius to doubt Remus is a true mystery, as is [even moreso!] their inability or unwillingness to believe Peter could be the traitor. Don't you wonder why in the world that would be? Even if I try hard to erase what we've discovered about Peter, it seemed he was more just tolerated than included in their group. Or maybe it was his hero-worship which made J&S think he'd never turn on them? And then again, why did Remus suspect Sirius? *Only* because he believed Sirius was the SK, or for some other, as yet unknown reason? There are quite a few missing pieces yet.... Siriusly Snapey Susan, who still struggles to type "Remus" instead of "Lupin." From R.Vink2 at chello.nl Wed Dec 8 22:54:30 2004 From: R.Vink2 at chello.nl (Renee) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 22:54:30 -0000 Subject: Sirius & Remus post-Hogwarts (was: Snape and McGonagall) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119529 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > Clearly James and Sirius suspected him [Remus] of being the traitor later on, > and that suspicion had to have some sort of basis, something more than > James's unwillingness to distrust Sirius or the supposed impossibility > that the traitor could be Peter. Renee: Is there a canon statement saying James didn't trust Remus? Or was he merely unwilling to assume Sirius could be wrong? Carol: It must have originated in some > change in behavior by Remus himself, which was misunderstood by the > others. Also, the suspicion was in place as early as Harry's baptism, > fifteen months before Godric's Hollow, at which Lupin was > conspicuously not present, even as a witness. Renee: I don't think we can draw any conclusions from Lupin's absence at Harry's baptism, because IIRC only Sirius was present, which means that Peter was absent, too. Yet he gets to be the Secret Keeper later on, so I don't think this counts. Moreover, the information that someone close to the Potters was a Voldemort spy probably came from Snape, and it seems unlikely Snape started working for Dumbledore as early as Harry's birth, fifteen months before Godric's Hollow. Also, why assume any focused suspicion among the Potters' friends before the information about the spy was passed on to the Order? From drliss at comcast.net Wed Dec 8 22:56:45 2004 From: drliss at comcast.net (drliss at comcast.net) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 22:56:45 +0000 Subject: Sirius and Remus Post Hogwarts Message-ID: <120820042256.22041.41B786AC000782F10000561922007481849C9C07049D0B@comcast.net> No: HPFGUIDX 119530 Oh, come on. It's a Sirius/Remus thread. You KNOW I have to weigh in ;) I agree with a lot of what Carol said initially, particularly in reference to Sirius. My comments: Carol: It's interesting, however, that Sirius was best man at the Potter's wedding (no indication that the other two were present although they must have been) and that Sirius alone attended Harry's baptism, where he served as godfather. The group was clearly disintegrating at that point. Lissa: Were they? It sounds like the Potter's wedding happened pretty openly, and someone besides Sirius and the Potters was certainly there. (I love the theory that Lupin took the picture, personally.) But Harry's baptism came at a time when it was getting dark and people were going into hiding. To me, that means that Remus and Peter were doing whatever they were doing, and James and Lily had the christening when Sirius was actually around. It was too bad Remus and Peter couldn't be there, but they were away, and they did it when they could. We also don't know what sort of emphasis the WW places on christenings. Sure, it would have been nice to have a party, but they couldn't. I'm also coming up against this problem in a fic I'm writing: if you have a big party with a lot of anti-Voldie people there, it's a target. Easy to get a lot of them at once. Although I DO want to hear more about why Remus and Peter were not there. As to why Sirius didn't trust Remus and how close they were.... I have a few theories on this, most of which kind of come together. 1.) I do think Sirius didn't want to believe that Peter or Remus was the spy. My guess is he pinned it on anyone else he could until it was narrowed down to it had to be Sirius, Peter, or Remus. Then he's left with Remus- who they all know is capable of lying his furry butt off, and Peter- whom Sirius considers a lesser wizard and not up to the task of spying. He suspected Remus because from Sirius's perspective, he HAD to suspect Remus. Remus was the logical choice. 2.) As Carol said, the werewolf factor. Now, I don't think Sirius thought it was because Remus was a werewolf that he would turn to Voldie. But it's been brought up several times in canon that Voldie gained supporters by offering creatures their rights. If Sirius knew that, it means he thought Remus had something very real to gain. 3.) How long did Sirius actually suspect Remus? We know Sirius is impulsive, and we know that he makes big decisions very quickly, being very convinced he's right. Is it possible he said "Okay, it's Remus. Let's switch it to Peter and I'll bait Remus"? I think so. The line that convinces me that Sirius and Remus were close- and close near that Halloween- was Peter saying "Wouldn't Sirius have told you if they switched?" (or something to that effect) Remus's answer isn't "Um, Peter, we weren't even speaking then," it's "Not if he believed I was the spy." He then turns to Sirius and says "I assume that's why you didn't tell me?" Now, I know Mr. Lupin is also Mr. Emotionally-Constipated and God-Forbid-I-Actually-Reveal-What-I'm-Thinking and Great-at-Lying-His-Furry-Behind-Off, but that exchange- including Sirius's casual plea for forgiveness (especially given that Sirius ALWAYS reveals what he's thinking and is NOT emotionally constipated)- makes me think that a.) there was not a huge wedge driven between them emotionally, b.) there was never any sort of confrontation, and c.) they were close enough that Peter honestly thought that that would work. Peter might not be the brightest bulb in the bucket, but he is good at manipulation. I think it would have had some chance of working, but now that Remus is on to him and has figured out what was going through Sirius's head, it didn't have a chance of working. But I think Peter had a valid point if you didn't figure out the whole story first. Anyway, hubby's gonna kill me if I don't get home soon, so.... Lissa [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From R.Vink2 at chello.nl Wed Dec 8 23:01:04 2004 From: R.Vink2 at chello.nl (Renee) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 23:01:04 -0000 Subject: Sirius & Remus post-Hogwarts (was: Snape and McGonagall) In-Reply-To: <20041208211428.65410.qmail@web53109.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119531 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Magda Grantwich wrote: > > > Peter was in there, fomenting dissent between Sirius and Remus. > And I'll bet he was so subtle about it that they didn't realize it > was happening. A few comments in the right time and place ("Gee > Sirius, I wonder why Remus wasn't at home last night. Didn't he say > he would be? Wonder where he was?" or "Gee, Remus, isn't it great > that Sirius and James are such great guys? I mean, still friends > even though you're a werewolf and more people know it now cause > you're applying for jobs and they don't care what people think!") and > both Sirius and Remus might start wondering about the other. > > Magda Renee: Yes, I can certainly see Peter fanning existing feelings of uneasines into outright suspicion - to avert it from himself. Though I'm still not sure whether Remus thought Sirius was the spy before Godric's Hollow or only afterward, when the Potters were betrayed and everyting pointed to Sirius. From foxmoth at qnet.com Wed Dec 8 23:02:03 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 23:02:03 -0000 Subject: Is Lupin good at potions was Re: Is Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119532 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nkafkafi" wrote: > > It is reasonable to suppose that Lupin completed a Potions NEWT with a good grade: he is intelligent, was probably a good student (a prefect and a "good boy" who started studying for the Transfiguration OWL minutes after getting out of the DADA exam) and he had a strong study group. He also has the disposition for Potions: quiet, patient, subtle and motivated. In fact, in the Pensive scene 15 yrs old Remus seems to be more patient and subtle than 15 yrs old Severus. For all we know, he could have got a better grade in his Potions NEWT than Snape did. > > Even if Lupin isn't "much of a potion brewer", he has very good reasons to make an exception and invest a lot of effort in learning how to brew the Wolfsbane Potion. He cannot always rely on expert Potions Masters brewing it for him. The price is likely to be high and he doesn't appear to be wealthy. He is a member of an outcast minority and might not want to reveal what he is in every new place he arrives at. He is also a member of an underground organization that at times was on the run from both DEs and the Ministry. If indeed only a small number of potions masters can brew the Wolfsbane Potion, and Lupin must get his potion every month from one of them, this means that it would be very easy to track Lupin down, no matter how well he is hiding. Pippin: I was agreeing with you (!) up to this point. Lupin does not have to take his potion at all if there is a safe place he can go to transform, or if there is an animagus whose presence can comfort and control him. You adduce good reasons that Lupin might want to learn to make the potion himself. However potion-making is not simply a matter of being careful and studious, or even Muggles could do it. Wizards seem to be naturally skilled at some magical arts more than others -- Hermione, for all she studies, is nowhere near as good at DADA as Harry. Neville is not nearly the disaster in other classes that he is at potion-making, even before Snape says anything hostile to him. If the ingredients are rare, controlled or expensive, it might be difficult for Lupin to get hold of them, and the learning process itself would be costly. This is a different situation than illegal drugs, where there is a huge mark-up between the price of the raw materials and the street value, so do-it-yourself would pay. Also, there is the matter of the disguised wizard in the Hogs Head who gave Hagrid the dragon's egg in Book One. This wizard can't have been much of a potion-maker, or he would have used polyjuice instead. Lupin's lack of ability may be a clue that he was the wizard in the Hogs Head. Pippin From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 8 23:03:43 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 23:03:43 -0000 Subject: Voldemort's "death" In-Reply-To: <20041208030530.85809.qmail@web53101.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119533 > > Kim asked: > > I too think the idea of a Dementor's soul-eating > > kiss sealing Voldemort's fate is a possibility. Do > > you think it's possible that LV doesn't even have a > > soul anymore? > > Juli replied: > I was just thinking, can you imagine LV's patronus? > What could it possibly be? Could he even cast one, I > mean has he ever been truly happy, not just Jajajaj > happy but happy happy, like when you see a friend that > you haven't seen in a ling time, or like when you fall > in love? Kim now: Good question. No, I can't imagine what LV's patronus would be or that he would even have one. It's been suggested on this list that a person's patronus is inspired by their father or protector (in the way Harry's patronus is his father's stag animagus), so in that case, LV wouldn't have much to base his patronus on. He'd essentially had no father because his father had rejected him and his mother before he was even born, and he'd hardly had a mother since she died soon after he was born. Did he have any adult mentors at the orphanage? Could he have used Dumbledore as his patronus inspiration once he got to Hogwarts? But there's no indication in canon (is there?) that DD ever viewed Tom Riddle as a surrogate son. Which provokes the question, somewhat off-topic (and somehow I think it must have been discussed already) -- do you think DD feels partly responsible for not intervening in the development of Tom Riddle's evil nature, that had he given TR the love and guidance he'd lacked from such an early age that TR might not have killed his own father and grandparents or gone on to become the mass murderer Lord Voldemort? Nevertheless I think we can't rule out the possibility that during LV's student days (as Tom Riddle) there might have been a class on how to cast a patronus charm. So maybe TR cut that class... ;-) But then, patronuses are only needed for fighting off Dementors (depression-monsters), right? In that case, Tom Riddle may have been so deeply in despair by the age of 12 or 13 that a Dementor would have had no effect on him anyway. In other words, if despair had already won him over, no need for him to fear the "despair monster" any longer. Then again too, what do Dementors do all day besides guard Azkaban Prison or come to Hogwarts in search of escapees like Sirius Black? So would the students of TR's day have even needed to learn the patronus charm? Of course, it's not a bad charm to have under your belt anyway. > Now answering to the posts: > If Harry somehow makes LV possess him, and he's kissed > by a dementor, wouldn't he also take Harry's soul? > Besides, LV can't possess Harry because of his > 'power'. So no I don't believe this is how LV will > finally die. It can't be in a duel either because we > already know what happens when their wands fight each > other (priori incantem), so my guess is it'll be > something completely different, something we'll never > seen before. Kim now: I agree! Juli continued: > LV not having a soul? How could it be? AFAIK he still > thinks and makes evil plans and everything, if he > didn't had a soul at all he would just be a machine, > just 'surviving' not living in every sense of the > word, enjoying life and being conscious of it. By the > way, where is Barty Jr? Is there like an island or > something for the soul-less? Kim: I guess the answer depends on what you think a soul is. If it's the life force, then it seems that a person should die once they're "kissed" by a Dementor. But Barty Jr. didn't die (maybe you've read Carol's post in this same thread where she quotes from OotP to show that Barty Jr. survived his encounter with a Dementor and also gives her thoughts on his circumstances after the encounter). As for LV, perhaps he does still have a soul, but it may have become so evil over the course of his life, that it's no longer much of a soul nor even redeemable. LV's soul sure isn't a "force for life" anymore like Harry's soul is, IMO. Or it could be that both parts of what you asked are true: LV does still have a soul, but he's also just a machine, just surviving in the most shallow sense, not enjoying life (emphasis on "joy" in the word "enjoying"), and definitely not conscious in the sense of being awakened to the realities of life. And since he can't accept life on its own terms (i.e. life's joys and sorrows), he has forsaken his own soul, in a sense. There's a really good article on the web that touches on the ethic of adaptation vs. the ethic of transcendence and I think it's relevant to this discussion (see "Wizards and wainscots : generic structures and genre themes in the Harry Potter series" by Kerrie Anne Le Lievre at www.findarticles.com) Just my three cents. Cheers, Kim From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 8 23:31:30 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 23:31:30 -0000 Subject: Series endings Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119534 Hey there! I realized today that I've gotten kind of tired at this point of hearing opinions, including my own, about how the HP series will or should end. After all, one or more among us may already have come up with the right ending (and that says something for the intellectual caliber of this list), even though none of us can prove it until the next two books have been published. But I want to be surprised!! So it's been fun, and sometimes not so fun, discussing with you all, but I bid you a fond farewell (at least for now...) Best wishes, Kim From pjarrett at gmail.com Wed Dec 8 15:46:29 2004 From: pjarrett at gmail.com (Patrick Jarrett) Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 10:46:29 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Is Snape really THAT good in Potions?(was: Snape and the Kappa) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3def328f0412080746116d1fd4@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119535 > SSSusan: > I think Potions *Master* IS an important term to take into > consideration when evaluating Snape's abilities. We don't hear > anyone refer to Flitwick as the Charms Master, nor McGonagall as the > Transfiguration Master. Now, I can't speak to whether "Master" would > be a both-gender appellation, but we do have the example of > Flitwick. He's always teacher or professor; not master. Don't you > think we're *meant* to take from that information that Snape *is* > considered an expert? Patrick: I admit I haven't closely followed this thread but I don't think my point has been brought up. I've always thought that "Potions Master" was a seperate title. Perhaps in the past the school has had another staff member who managed any school-needed potions, and this person didn't have to be the potions professor. For example, It could have been Madame Pomfrey in the past. Or maybe, professors were busier in the past years and didn't have time to do as Snape does. But today the extra person isn't needed because Snape is able to both teach and brew. Before I bring a rain of fire down upon me, I agree that Snape is very very good at what he does. I'm just brining my view into the ring. In any case, just my two cents. -- Patrick From patkin at easternct.edu Wed Dec 8 17:22:07 2004 From: patkin at easternct.edu (TOLES-PATKIN,Terri (Communications)) Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 12:22:07 -0500 Subject: Warlock/Wizard - was Asking JKR just one question Message-ID: <767D98BAB669E74E8CFCB861554159FB0484B100@ecsube2.ec-admin.easternct.edu> No: HPFGUIDX 119536 Finwitch: >>Or maybe it's that magical power or skill goes - Muggle, Squib, witch/warlock, wizard. After all, the word 'wizard' also refers to high skill (particularly in computing, also there are those graph- creating wizards and installation wizards...).<< This makes sense to me. After all, they talk about people being "fully qualified wizards." ttp From nysrk321 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 8 18:56:47 2004 From: nysrk321 at yahoo.com (nysrk321) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 18:56:47 -0000 Subject: Petunia, New Headquarters, and Ron and Hermione (LONG) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119537 Hey everyone, First off wanted to say "Hi" to everyone, I'm new, just joined a couple days ago. I have been reading the current (as well as past) posts, to see if anyone had addressed any of the questions that I have had going thru my head for a while now. Since they were not, I'm going to pose them to you all. *All page ref. are OOP US Hardback* 1.Petunia--After Harry fights with the dementors and brings Dudley home, Vernon starts shouting at Harry for harming his son. Then Petunia lets *slip* that she knows more about the WW than was originally let on. Then Harry tells the Dursleys that LV is back, and Petunia is very, very fearful when she hears this. "Back?" whispered Aunt Petunia. pg 37. Then she looks at Harry like she never had before...first paragraph pg 38. Is it just me, or does it seem like she is really, truly frightened when she hears that Voldy is back? Like she may have had a previous encounter with him? I've been thinking and maybe Petunia DID have a previous encounter with LV. Maybe when he was looking for the Potters and since the (rat) Charm was already in place, he couldn't find them yet? What if he went to the Evans' house, and demanded Petunia, and her parents to tell him where they were? But maybe Dumbledore didn't tell the Evans' where they were going to be, because of this? And since Voldy may not have believed them, he killed Petunia's parents in front of her. Then turned on Petunia, and said the same thing, only she somehow *got out* of being AKed by Voldemort. I remember him saying something like "She needn't have died " in the graveyard about Lily. But what if Petunia blames their parents' death on Lily and her "freakishness", and thereby cementing her hatred of the WW? (And we STILL don't know about the Evans' parents, dead, alive .? We want to KNOW!!) 2.Ron and Hermione -- The day of Harry's Hearing they get their booklists, and Ron and Hermione are named prefects. Harry is jealous of Ron for about 2 seconds .then Moody shows him a picture of the First Order and then Harry goes upstairs, and he hears someone crying in one of the rooms. (pg.175) He looks inside and sees Ron dead. Now the first time I read this, I freaked, because "How can Ron die?? He can't DIE!!" Then we learn that it is boggart, and it keeps changing into the Weasely family members. (The ones that we do see dead, I just can't help thinking that it is NOT a coincidence ) Then waaaaay later in the DOM, (pg 792, 793), Dolohov (who is unable to speak), curses Hermione. " the DE made a slashing movement with his wand, and out flew a streak of purple flame. It passed through her chest then lay motionless." Harry's panics and thinks "don't let her be dead, please don't let her be dead, it's my fault ." This is the second time in ONE book where we get this false image of death. It's both Ron and Hermione that Harry "sees" as dead. Does anyone else think that this could be foreshadowing? *And on a side note* After their Divination O.W.L. (pg 718) Ron says "I don't care if my tea leaves spell, die, Ron, die"?I'm chucking them in the bin where they belong!" (Bold was MY emphasis..) Ron has "surrounded" his OWN name with the word "die". Maybe he'll get himself into trouble that he won't be able to get out of ? And I think that in this statement, Ron says that he is pretty much not going to pay attention to the "signs" of death that may end up around him. (These 2 instances are what make me think that Ron will not make it to the end of the series .) 3. New Headquarters -- When Harry first gets to Sirius' house, they're having a meeting. Harry goes upstairs and *reunites* with Ron, and Hermione. (By shouting at them ) After the meeting is over they all go into the kitchen for dinner, but they aren't fully done cleaning up after their meeting, are they? Pg. 80? Tonks knocks something over on the table and Mrs.Weasley cleans it up, and " in the flash of light Harry caught a glimpse of what looked like a building plan". Could this be a plan for a new headquarters (esp. now since Grimmauld Place seems to be "up in the air"? Or could it be the plans for something else that DD maybe planning? Ideas, suggestions on this PLEASE!! Hmmm well, I think that's it sorry it's soo long, but I haven't read anything anywhere that addressed these 3 things. (Not in the way that I am looking at them anyways.) I'm sorry if any of these topics have been discussed at length, but I haven't been able to find anything. I look forward to reading people's thoughts on this. (Esp. about Petunia) Hima :) (it rhymes with the alcoholic drink "Zima" himazima...hahaha drunk freshman figured that out one day a couple years ago. Genius! I tell ya ) From annettehamel at hotmail.com Wed Dec 8 20:43:38 2004 From: annettehamel at hotmail.com (Annette Hamel) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 20:43:38 +0000 Subject: Wand intelligence? (was: Harry's Protection) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119538 Jen Reese wrote: <> Or, do wands *themselves* have some kind of native intelligence/power independent of the wizard? One would think that a wand is just a "conductor" of the wizard's power, a means of focusing it - but Ollivander told Harry "the wand chooses the wizard" (implying the wand has some kind of will or intelligence of its own) and even the priori incantatum seems to imply that the wand is able to "remember" its past spells, even if the wizard wielding it (in this case, Harry) is unaware of this feature of wands. Perhaps Voldemort's and Harry's wands chose their owners as part of fulfilling the prophecy? Also, in some cases the wizard is unable to perform a certain spell or charm because he doesn't have his wand to hand. Just a thought to ponder - I've wondered if the wands in JKR's world have some sort of special powers of their own. (My first post) Annette From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 8 21:32:09 2004 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 21:32:09 -0000 Subject: Snape's Karma (was: Snape and Lupin's Character Arcs (was: Lupin's Char Arc)) In-Reply-To: <20041208024353.71926.qmail@web53107.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119539 > Pippin wrote: Yeah, he's a jerk all right. But that's not a crime. It's bad karma, if you believe in that...< > Lupinlore answered: I agree that Snape has accumulated a load of bad karma, and I'm anxious to see it discharged. One way is for him to do something spectacularly good (something he has already done just doesn't cut the mustard in a literary sense). >Lupinlore again: (I think!) Personally, as I have said before, I don't think Snape has it in him to do something good enough to discharge the "bad karma" he's accumulated through his cruelty to Harry. Therefore I tend to think he will die in the end.< > Juli replied: I don't think Snape will die, there just isn't any surprise in that, If Snape's got bad karma it's because of what he did as a DE, but he's been working for the good side for about 15 years now, I'd say bad karma is all gone. Betsy: Hmm... The karma question is interesting. I think Snape has stuff to work out, but I doubt that its outcome would be his death. Instead, I think he's going through a sort of karmic cleansing right now. Snape is being forced to deal with his old issues with the Marauders, first by a child the spitting image of his worst rival, and then by the actual reappearance of Lupin and Sirius. And not only are these three reminders around Snape, but Snape is being forced to work with them. (I think it's a delicious twist that in order to right whatever wrongs he did as a DE Snape has to face that part of his Hogwarts days he'd most like to bury.) I think the ultimate of karmic justice would be for Snape and Harry (and maybe Lupin too?) to gain a certain amount of respect for each other. I don't need them to go skipping off into the sunset together, the best of friends, but civility would be nice. Instead of some great act of goodness I think Snape needs to let go of his old hatred of James and finally work with Harry. Like an adult would do. (Obviously, Harry needs to work through his hatred of Snape too. And I think the very irrationality of his hatred of Snape at the end of OOP hints towards some sort of reconciliation -- or maybe a duel to the death *eg*. But I predict growth for Harry and healing for Snape.) Betsy, who loved OotP very, very much. From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Wed Dec 8 20:45:28 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 12:45:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: Who is Mr Prentice? Message-ID: <20041208204528.55291.qmail@web53109.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119540 Last night I was reading OoP for the hundredth time, and, well, I noticed something I've never really seen before, anyway, here it goes: 'Keep your wand out,' she told Harry, as they entered Wisteria Walk. 'Never mind the Statute of Secrecy now, there's going to be hell to pay anyway, we might as well be hanged for a dragon as an egg. Talk about the Reasonable Restriction of Underage Sorcery this was exactly what Dumbledore was afraid of - What's that at the end of the street? Oh, it's just Mr Prentice don't put your wand away, boy, don't I keep telling you I'm no use?' (OoP, Ch 2, A Peck of Owls) This happens right after Harry and Dudley are attacked by dementors. My question is Who is Mr Prentice? Is he a muggle, a Squib, a wizard? My guess is he's either a squib or a wizard, why else would Mrs Figg allow him to see Harry with a wand? Thoughts anyone? Juli From griffin782002 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 9 00:22:10 2004 From: griffin782002 at yahoo.com (sp. sot.) Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 16:22:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Who is Mr Prentice? In-Reply-To: <20041208204528.55291.qmail@web53109.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041209002210.94898.qmail@web52701.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119541 Juli wrote: Last night I was reading OoP for the hundredth time, and, well, I noticed something I've never really seen before, anyway, here it goes: 'Keep your wand out,' she told Harry, as they entered Wisteria Walk. 'Never mind the Statute of Secrecy now, there's going to be hell to pay anyway, we might as well be hanged for a dragon as an egg. Talk about the Reasonable Restriction of Underage Sorcery? this was exactly what Dumbledore was afraid of - What's that at the end of the street? Oh, it's just Mr Prentice? don't put your wand away, boy, don't I keep telling you I'm no use?' (OoP, Ch 2, A Peck of Owls) This happens right after Harry and Dudley are attacked by dementors. My question is Who is Mr Prentice? Is he a muggle, a Squib, a wizard? My guess is he's either a squib or a wizard, why else would Mrs Figg allow him to see Harry with a wand? Thoughts anyone? Juli Griffin782002 now: I think Mr Prentice must be one of Mrs Figg's cats. She had statioed one of her cats outside Harry's house in case something could happened. It is logical that she used her cats again just in case. 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 Links __________________________________________________ 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 jlnbtr at yahoo.com Thu Dec 9 00:35:36 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 16:35:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Petunia, New Headquarters, and Ron and Hermione (LONG) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041209003536.23298.qmail@web53109.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119542 --- nysrk321 wrote: Welcome Hima, nice post! > *All page ref. are OOP US Hardback* >> 1.Petunia--After Harry fights with the dementors and brings Dudley home, Vernon starts shouting at Harry for harming his son. Then Petunia lets *slip* that she knows more about the WW than was originally let on. Then Harry tells the Dursleys that LV is back, and Petunia is very, very fearful when she hears this. "Back?" whispered Aunt Petunia. pg 37. Then she looks at Harry like she never had before...first paragraph pg 38. Is it just me, or does it seem like she is really, truly frightened when she hears that Voldy is back? Juli: Of course she's afraid, LV is the person who killed her sister, she may not agree with her lifestyle and everything but Lily was still her sister and I bet she loved her. We don't really know but LV may have also killed her parents, so why wouldn't she be afraid that the person or *thinh* that killed her entire family was back. >> Like she may have had a previous encounter with him? I've been thinking and maybe Petunia DID have a previous encounter with LV. Maybe when he was looking for the Potters and since the (rat) Charm was already in place, he couldn't find them yet? What if he went to the Evans' house, and demanded Petunia, and her parents to tell him where they were? But maybe Dumbledore didn't tell the Evans' where they were going to be, because of this? And since Voldy may not have believed them, he killed Petunia's parents in front of her. Then turned on Petunia, and said the same thing, only she somehow *got out* of being AKed by Voldemort. Juli: Your theory just has a slight problem: The only person to ever survive an AK is Harry (Crouch!Moody in GoF Ch 14, The Unforgivable Curses: "Not nice," he said calmly. "Not pleasant. And there's no countercurse. There's no blocking it. Only one known person has ever survived it, and he's sitting right in front of me." refering to Harry), so if Petunia was sometime AK'd by LV, she wouldn't be here. >>I remember him saying something like "She needn't have died" in the graveyard about Lily. But what if Petunia blames their parents' death on Lily and her "freakishness", and thereby cementing her hatred of the WW? Juli: The way I read it LV was just after Harry when he went to Godric's Hollow, he didn't really want to kill Lily and James, they just got in his way. PoA Ch 9, Grim Defeat: Harry's at the Quiditch match when dementors come near him, he hears his mom and LV: "Not Harry, not Harry, please not Harry!" "Stand aside, you silly girl... stand aside, now...." "Not Harry, please no, take me, kill me instead --" > (And we STILL don't know about the Evans' parents, > dead, alive.? > We want to KNOW!!) Juli: They are dead, Petunia is Harr's only living relative: PS/SS Ch 1 The Boy Who Lived: "I've come to bring Harry to his aunt and uncle. They're the only family he has left now." This is when DD explains MM why they're there. > 2.Ron and Hermione -- The day of Harry's Hearing > they get their > booklists, and Ron and Hermione are named prefects. > Harry is > jealous of Ron for about 2 seconds. Juli: Actually he stopped feeling jealous when Sirius told him neither him or James were ever Prefects, > 3. New Headquarters -- When Harry first gets to > Sirius' house, > they're having a meeting. Harry goes upstairs and > *reunites* with > Ron, and Hermione. (By shouting at them) After > the meeting is > over they all go into the kitchen for dinner, but > they aren't fully > done cleaning up after their meeting, are they? Pg. > 80 Tonks > knocks something over on the table and Mrs.Weasley > cleans it up, > and "in the flash of lightHarry caught a glimpse > of what looked > like a building plan". Could this be a plan for a > new headquarters > (esp. now since Grimmauld Place seems to be "up in > the air"? Or > could it be the plans for something else that DD > maybe planning? Juli: I always believed this was a plan of the MoM, we know the Order Members are always looking for any DEs that may enter the DoM. Juli __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Thu Dec 9 00:46:04 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 16:46:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Wand intelligence? (was: Harry's Protection) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041209004604.52329.qmail@web53107.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119543 --- Annette Hamel wrote: >> Or, do wands *themselves* have some kind of native intelligence/power independent of the wizard? One would think that a wand is just a "conductor" of the wizard's power, a means of focusing it - but Ollivander told Harry "the wand chooses the wizard" (implying the wand has some kind of will or intelligence of its own) and even the priori incantatum seems to imply that the wand is able to "remember" its past spells, even if the wizard wielding it (in this case, Harry) is unaware of this feature of wands. Perhaps Voldemort's and Harry's wands chose their owners as part of fulfilling the prophecy? Also, in some cases the wizard is unable to perform a certain spell or charm because he doesn't have his wand to hand. Juli: Welcome Annette! Since wands have a magical core they must possess some magic themselves, and every wand seems to have a special quality and kind of magic it prefers: Lily's was good at charms, James at Transfiguration. Every wand prefers its owner, any wizard may use an other wizards' wand, but the results aren't the best, So yes, I think the wands have some intelligence. The fact that both Harry's and LV's wands come from the same phoenix (Fawkes actually) is quite interesting, not only is it the reason why LV couldn't kill Harry at the end of GoF, but I believe there's something else to it, hopefully we'll find out by book seven. Juli __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? All your favorites on one personal page Try My Yahoo! http://my.yahoo.com From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Thu Dec 9 00:55:29 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 16:55:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: Who is Mr Prentice? In-Reply-To: <20041209002210.94898.qmail@web52701.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041209005529.60860.qmail@web53105.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119544 > Juli earlier: > What's that at the end of the street? Oh, it's just > Mr Prentice don't put your wand away, boy, don't I > keep telling you I'm no use?' > (OoP, Ch 2, A Peck of Owls) > > My question is Who is Mr Prentice? Is he a muggle, a > Squib, a wizard? Griffin782002 replied: >>I think Mr Prentice must be one of Mrs Figg's cats She had stationed one of her cats outside Harry's house in case something could happened. It is logical that she used her cats again just in case.<< Juli again: didn't think of that, and she does name her cats Mr & Mrs (Mr Tibbles), so yeah you could be right, but I still think it's a human. Juli From sevenhundredandthirteen at yahoo.com Thu Dec 9 01:52:53 2004 From: sevenhundredandthirteen at yahoo.com (sevenhundredandthirteen) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 01:52:53 -0000 Subject: Ron and Luna living close by (was Re: Hermione's Patonus) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119545 > Steve wrote: > Who is now wondering why Ron didn't know who Luna was before when > she lives so close by. But spatial promixity doesn't matter so much when you can apparate, travel by floo powder or portkeys. Living close to someone doesn't automatically mean you share a communal bond- not if there are ways of travelling great distances away from that local community in tiny amounts of time. It's like the internet- why talk with the people who live close by when you are only seconds away from people who are on the other side of the world? People who you actually share more in common with? The Weasleys are most definitely aware the Lovegoods exist, they would take the same portkey any time there was a big wizarding event (like meeting at the bus stop, but never going to the same destination), but when you can take that zippy portkey, presumably, halfway across the globe in only a matter of seconds, your local community becomes less important. What our muggle world is beginning to experience these days (the global village, being able to make a community that is not based on geography but on common interests) the Wizarding World must have experienced for centuries. ~<(Laurasia)>~ From garybec101 at comcast.net Thu Dec 9 02:31:50 2004 From: garybec101 at comcast.net (garybec101 at comcast.net) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 02:31:50 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The silver hand (Was: The Darkness Within) Message-ID: <120920040231.13541.41B7B9160002BC43000034E52205886360CECFCE0C0A0D979D0E09@comcast.net> No: HPFGUIDX 119546 -------------- Original message -------------- azriona: > > I doubt that the hand will disappear. Voldy is supposed to be > super > > strong, magically speaking; I wouldn't put it past him to be able > to > > create an object out of thin air. Tammy replies: JKR herself said that conjured objects don't stay around that long - "There is legislation about what you can conjure and what you can't. Something that you conjure out of thin air will not last. This is a rule I set down for myself early on." Thus, if Wormtail's hand is staying around, it must be because it was specifically manufactured by someone at some point. Maybe it's sort of like the food issue, the food stays because the food is cooked by the house elves and it's just "conjured" up to the hall. Perhaps the hand was made beforehand. Amputations have to happen in the magical world too, perhaps it's just a matter of getting the hand from it's storage place, which would mean it doesn't qualify as a conjured item. * * Becki has an idea; First I have to add the dreaded disclaimer about someone else having this idea. I am so far behind, catching up slowly, but this post got me thinkin'. Perhaps the hand was not conjured out of thin air. Actually, the hand was still in the pot. Could LV have just transfigured it into silver, just changed its properities? (my 10 year old is studying matter right now) Just another of a long line of theories. * Becki, trying so hard to get caught up. 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 dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 9 02:41:41 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 02:41:41 -0000 Subject: Wand intelligence? (was: Harry's Protection) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119547 Anette: Or, do wands *themselves* have some kind of native intelligence/power independent of the wizard? One would think that a wand is just "conductor" of the wizard's power, a means of focusing it - but Ollivander told Harry "the wand chooses the wizard" (implying the wand has some kind of will or intelligence of its own) and even the priori incantatum seems to imply that the wand is able to "remember" its past spells, even if the wizard wielding it (in this case, Harry) is unaware of this feature of wands. Perhaps Voldemort's and Harry's wands chose their owners as part of fulfilling the prophecy? Also, in some cases the wizard is unable to perform a certain spell or charm because he doesn't have his wand to hand. Alla: Welcome, Annette! Yes, the "wands chooses the wizard" sounds intriguing to me too. I don't remember details on last discussion of this topic, but I do remember that some list members opinion was that Mr. Olivander exaggerated (again, I apologise, I don't remember other opinions). I believe that there is at least some truth in his statement - meaning that wands DO have if not intelligence, than at least some independent magical energy, put into them by their makers. My speculation is that when this energy is on the same wave as any particular witch or wizard's magical energy, or signature, or magical core , then wand chooses them. I don't know if I would go that far as saying that wands did the choosing as part of the prophecy though, mainly because I believe that we are about to get a big surprise as how prophecy will be fulfilled. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 9 02:55:19 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 02:55:19 -0000 Subject: Sirius & Remus post-Hogwarts (was: Snape and McGonagall) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119548 > Renee: > Yes, I can certainly see Peter fanning existing feelings of > uneasines into outright suspicion - to avert it from himself. > Though I'm still not sure whether Remus thought Sirius was the spy > before Godric's Hollow or only afterward, when the Potters were > betrayed and everyting pointed to Sirius. Hi, Renee! I believe we can be sure that Remus suspected Sirius before Godric Hollow murders took place. The only place where we learn about their mutual suspicion is this quote, right? "Remus!" Pettigrew squeaked, truning to Lupin instead, writhing imploringly in front of him. "You don't believe this...Wouldn't Sirius have told you they'd change the plan?" "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 Pettigrew's 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?" "Of course," said Black and the ghost of grin flitted across his gaunt face." - POA, brit.ed. p.273 I believe the exchange assumes that suspicions were simultaneous. Sirius apologises for mistrusting Remus and he does the same. Moreover, Remus does not apologises for believing that Sirius was a murderer, only a spy. Just my opinion. Alla From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 9 03:34:02 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 03:34:02 -0000 Subject: Snape and Lupin's Character Arcs (was: Lupin's Char Arc) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119549 > Lupinlore: In terms of treating Harry like a hero -- well, Harry *is* a hero, and has proved it on several occasions. Being treated like one is only appropriate.< Pippin: Snape has denigrated Harry's celebrity status only twice, IIRC. Once during the first class when he was indeed only famous for being famous, and once when Harry seemed to think that being Harry Potter meant Sirius wouldn't dare attack him. It was not appropriate, IMO, to treat Harry like a hero at those times. Alla: I realised that my interpretation of Snape's character is probably quite close to Eloise' recent post (although I suspect that we make quite different evaluations based on those interpretations :o))and especially to those Alan Rickman's comments she reposted recently. As related to this post, I believe that Snape is VERY insecure person AND very jealous of Harry's celebrity status and the fact that Harry has the power to defeat Voldemort (or at least Jo lead us to believe it), while Snape would like to defeat Voldemort himself. Therefore, I believe that the main reason for those comments was jealousy. IF this is indeed correct, I wish Harry would offer Snape to switch places and see how he likes it. :o) From sevenhundredandthirteen at yahoo.com Thu Dec 9 03:50:00 2004 From: sevenhundredandthirteen at yahoo.com (sevenhundredandthirteen) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 03:50:00 -0000 Subject: Angry Harry in HBP? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119550 An article in today's paper (Sydney Morning Herald, Dec 9 2004: http://smh.com.au/articles/2004/12/08/1102182348990.html ) had a few comments from Fiona Boyle (author of "A Muggle's Guide to Harry Potter") in which she says she expects Harry to continue throwing temper tantrums in the next books. Whilst I don't think Harry will give up his angst that easily, I think it would be thematically better (and more representative of real-life coping) for Harry to act down, depressed and hopeless, not still angry. Hermione, the voice of reason, directly addresses Harry's 'saving people thing' at the end of OotP. This then leads to Sirius' death, and Harry knows it. To me, this suggests that Harry will reject this part of himself entirely. 'If I try to save people, they die. In that case I won't try any more.' Can Harry stay angry at Dumbledore when the man admits to everything he screams at him in a violent rage? Can he even stay angry at Voldemort when he's just been told he has little choice but to murder him? Dumbledore's interpretation of the prophecy basically orders Harry to hate Voldemort. Will Harry want to do what he has been ordered to do by some mystic prophetic force? I don't think so. And I think that in order to resist the prophecy Harry will surrender to it, get very depressed about his, apparently, imminent death and then just give up all hope entirely. In OotP we saw Harry actively reject what was being thrown at him- resisting Umbridge, starting the DA, yelling at people quite a lot. In HBP I want to see Harry fall into the status quo and let all that happen without trying to help. By rejecting his courage- the part of him that wants to help others- I expect Harry to give up in many things- quit Quidditch, stop trying in school, refuse to defend Draco's taunts, let Snape win. Maybe even start a spending spree with his Gringotts account, figuring 'Well, Voldemort is going to kill me one of these days, I better give myself as many fancy presents as I can.' I want him to see Harry turn into the despicable Draco Malfoy and see his reaction when he looks at his own reflection and discovers what he has reduced himself to. Only through his friends proving how much they actually need him will Harry once again gain hope and find some reason to carry on. I want Harry to choose to fight Voldemort because he believes it to be the right thing to do, not because some prophecy told him to. And in order to do that, I think Harry should see what a lack of bravery does- how despicable he becomes when he is a coward, or, just apathetic. I think the determination to fight Voldemort to the death and to accept his place in the prophecy should come only after Harry has surrendered to it all. I think for Harry to give up his strong Gryffindor traits of bravery and courage for a period of time will make his final battle with Voldemort much more powerful. He isn't brave and courageous because he has some innate inborn quality- he has to *choose* to use it. ~<(Laurasia)>~ From khinterberg at yahoo.com Thu Dec 9 04:04:38 2004 From: khinterberg at yahoo.com (khinterberg) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 04:04:38 -0000 Subject: To vanquish In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119551 Replying to my own post here, I work at a library so today I got out the Oxford and looked up "vanquish" there. Now THIS was much more interesting. 1. overcome or defeat (an opponent or enemy) in conflict or battle b. overcome by spiritual power c. expel or banish from a place 2. overcome (a person) by some means other than physical conflict 3. subdue, suppress, put an end to, (a feeling, state of things, etc.) 4. win or gain ( a battle or other contest). 5. be victorious, gain victory I particularly like definition 2! khinterberg --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "khinterberg" wrote: > > In light of all the recent posts about the nature of what "vanquish" > actually means, I decided to look it up. > > van?quish Audio pronunciation of "vanquish" ( P ) Pronunciation Key > (vngkwsh, vn-) > tr.v. van?quished, van?quish?ing, van?quish?es > > 1. > 1. To defeat or conquer in battle; subjugate. > 2. To defeat in a contest, conflict, or competition. > 2. To overcome or subdue (an emotion, for example); suppress: "She > had had to wrench herself forcibly away from Katharine, and every step > vanquished her desire" (Virginia Woolf). See Synonyms at defeat. > > [Middle English vaynquisshen, from Old French vainquir, vainquiss-, > from Latin vincere. See weik-3 in Indo-European Roots.] > > v : come out better in a competition, race, or conflict; "Agassi beat > Becker in the tennis championship"; "We beat the competition"; > "Harvard defeated Yale in the last football game" [syn: beat, beat > out, crush, shell, trounce] > > \Van"quish\, v. t. [imp. & p. p. Vanquished; p. pr. & vb. n. > Vanquishing.] [OE. venquishen, venquissen, venkisen,F. vaincre, pret. > vainquis, OF. veintre, pret. venqui, venquis (cf. an OF. infin. > vainquir), fr. L. vincere; akin to AS. w[=i]g war, battle, w[=i]gant a > warrior, w[=i]gan to fight, Icel. v[=i]g battle, Goth. weihan to > fight, contend. Cf. Convince, Evict, Invincible, Victor.] 1. To > conquer, overcome, or subdue in battle, as an enemy. --Hakluyt. > > They . . . Vanquished the rebels in all encounters. --Clarendon. > > 2. Hence, to defeat in any contest; to get the better of; to put down; > to refute. > > This bold assertion has been fully vanquished in a late reply to the > Bishop of Meaux's treatise. --Atterbury. > > For e'en though vanquished, he could argue still. --Goldsmith. > > Syn: To conquer; surmount; overcome; confute; silence. See Conquer. > > > So on I went to the synonyms, searching for more information. > > de?feat Audio pronunciation of "defeat" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (d-ft) > tr.v. de?feat?ed, de?feat?ing, de?feats > > 1. To win victory over; beat. > 2. To prevent the success of; thwart: Internal strife defeats the > purpose of teamwork. > 3. Law. To make void; annul. > > snipped from synonyms of defeat: > > Synonyms: defeat, conquer, vanquish, beat, rout, subdue, subjugate, > overcome > These verbs mean to triumph over an adversary. Defeat is the most general. > Vanquish emphasizes total mastery: Napoleon's forces were vanquished > at Waterloo. > > 3. To overcome or vanquish, as an army; to check, disperse, or ruin > by victory; to overthrow. > > > So after all this, it can be concluded that death does not need to be > involved in the act of vanquishing, but that Harry would need to > completely prevent Voldemort from reaching his goals. > > I'm sure many of you have looked this up before, just thought it might > be nice to have around. > > khinterberg, who, upon looking up vanquish, found than an alternate > definition is a disease of sheep in which they "pine away", and is now > picturing Voldemort as a fluffy white sheep looking thoroughly dejected From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 9 04:10:38 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 04:10:38 -0000 Subject: Angry Harry in HBP? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119552 Laurasia wrote: An article in today's paper (Sydney Morning Herald, Dec 9 2004: http://smh.com.au/articles/2004/12/08/1102182348990.html ) had a few comments from Fiona Boyle (author of "A Muggle's Guide to Harry Potter") in which she says she expects Harry to continue throwing temper tantrums in the next books. Whilst I don't think Harry will give up his angst that easily, I think it would be thematically better (and more representative of real-life coping) for Harry to act down, depressed and hopeless, not still angry. Hermione, the voice of reason, directly addresses Harry's 'saving people thing' at the end of OotP. This then leads to Sirius' death, and Harry knows it. To me, this suggests that Harry will reject this part of himself entirely. 'If I try to save people, they die. In that case I won't try any more.' snip. Will Harry want to do what he has been ordered to do by some mystic prophetic force? I don't think so. And I think that in order to resist the prophecy Harry will surrender to it, get very depressed about his, apparently, imminent death and then just give up all hope entirely. In OotP we saw Harry actively reject what was being thrown at him- resisting Umbridge, starting the DA, yelling at people quite a lot. In HBP I want to see Harry fall into the status quo and let all that happen without trying to help. By rejecting his courage- the part of him that wants to help others- I expect Harry to give up in many things- quit Quidditch, stop trying in school, refuse to defend Draco's taunts, let Snape win. snip. I want him to see Harry turn into the despicable Draco Malfoy and see his reaction when he looks at his own reflection and discovers what he has reduced himself to. Only through his friends proving how much they actually need him will Harry once again gain hope and find some reason to carry on. snip I think the determination to fight Voldemort to the death and to accept his place in the prophecy should come only after Harry has surrendered to it all. I think for Harry to give up his strong Gryffindor traits of bravery and courage for a period of time will make his final battle with Voldemort much more powerful. He isn't brave and courageous because he has some innate inborn quality- he > has to *choose* to use it. Alla: Very interesting post. Even though I don't want Harry to become pre- OOP Harry, I am with you here - I don't think we 'll see always angry Harry in HBP. Yes, I think we'll see depressed and grieving Harry, but again this "he will have to master his emotions in order to be useful" quote makes me wonder how long this stage will last. Unfortunately I don't think that Jo will allow Harry to doubt his destiny for a long time. I will be glad if it will last a couple of chapters. Like maybe he will decide to give up one thing - Quidditch for example and then some kind of disaster strikes and Harry is back to the rescue. Too bad though, I would love him to doubt his destiny. But I am telling you - I like your interpretation MUCH better than mine prediction and I will be incredibly happy if yours will be correct. Yes, Harry has to choose his courage and I agree - to win over Voldemort Harry has to stop being afraid of death (maybe he WILL travel to underworld after all). I think not being afraid of death will help him survive at the end. It will be fun, if Harry lets Snape insults go unanswered for a while, but then finally explodes. In any event, I don't believe that JKR will take it as far as turning Harry in Malfoy's clone. She is too adamant in drawing distinction between them . :o) From willsonkmom at msn.com Thu Dec 9 04:42:34 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 04:42:34 -0000 Subject: Lupin, Snape and Potions (was Re: Is Snape really THAT good in Potions?( In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119553 > Neri: > If I remember my canon right, the little of what we know about > Lupin's brewing abilities comes from the same passage in PoA that (I > still maintain, in the absence of counter-examples) is our sole > direct canon for Snape's brewing abilities. Potioncat: I agree, that the only character who ever speaks about Snape's skill at potions is Lupin. Now, if the reader feels Lupin is pretty much trustworthy, the reader will believe him. If the reader feels he is ESE or just not trustworthy, the reader will reserve judgement. I will have to say that I am enough of a hypocrit to believe Lupin is correct about Snape, but may not be telling the truth about himself. Neri: snip > It is reasonable to suppose that Lupin completed a Potions NEWT with > a good grade: he is intelligent, was probably a good student (a > prefect and a "good boy" who started studying for the Transfiguration > OWL minutes after getting out of the DADA exam) and he had a strong > study group. He also has the disposition for Potions: quiet, patient, > subtle and motivated. In fact, in the Pensive scene 15 yrs old Remus > seems to be more patient and subtle than 15 yrs old Severus. For all > we know, he could have got a better grade in his Potions NEWT than > Snape did. Potioncat: I don't think it is reasonable to think Lupin took Potions after OWL level. I don't doubt that if he did take it, he did well at it. But I don't think we have any idea what he took. No, I take that back. I'll bet he took DADA. I think he took Charms and Transfigurations. I'm basing that on what I think we've see him doing at Hogwarts and at GP. I would bet that neither James nor Sirius took Potions and that in itself may have kept Remus out of it. Or he may have avoided Potions to avoid Severus. Keep in mind, wolfsbane hadn't been invented yet, so there wasn't that motivation. My point is, we don't have any canon to tell us what NEWT level courses any of the Marauders took. But even I have to smile at the idea of Remus and Severus in Potions together and Remus getting a better grade! Potioncat From coriolan at worldnet.att.net Thu Dec 9 04:43:56 2004 From: coriolan at worldnet.att.net (coriolan_cmc) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 04:43:56 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?FILK:_O,_Riddle=92s_Whims_Bought_Death_To_Them?= Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119554 O, Riddle's Whims Bought Death To Them (OOP, Chap. 9) To the tune of O Little Town of Bethlehem Lyrics and MIDI at: http://www.carols.org.uk/o_little_town_of_bethlehem.htm THE SCENE: 12 Grimmauld Place. HARRY is less than receptive to MOODY'S display of an old photograph of the original Order of the Phoenix MOODY: O, Riddle's whims bought death to them Who fought him in the war You see them pose in my photos, The OOP before. Here is Caradoc Dearborn Who somehow disappeared. Poor Edgar Bones got laid out prone And Elphie's hat looks weird Voldy himself slew Meadowes, McKinnon felt his spleen Benjy Fenwick, poor chap, then quick Got blown to smithereens. O mourned we hard together With tears and deep unease When Gideon and Fabian Were slain by five DEs (HARRY notices Peter Pettigrew standing alongside his parents) HARRY How secretly, how secretly Did Pete his plans keep hidden The dirty rat my Mum and Dad Sold to do Voldy's biddin' No one knew what was coming, Especially not Black In his crew cut no scuttlebutt Warned him of Pete's attack. O, Voldy's whims bought death to them In Moody's photograph I at this date can't calculate Who'll have the final laugh. Moody was downright eager To give this show-and-tell His Polaroid made me annoyed It's unforgivable! - CMC HARRY POTTER FILKS http://home.att.net/~coriolan/hpfilks.htm From imamommy at sbcglobal.net Thu Dec 9 04:49:37 2004 From: imamommy at sbcglobal.net (imamommy at sbcglobal.net) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 04:49:37 -0000 Subject: Angry Harry in HBP? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119555 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > Laurasia wrote: > An article in today's paper (Sydney Morning Herald, Dec 9 2004: > http://smh.com.au/articles/2004/12/08/1102182348990.html ) had a few > comments from Fiona Boyle (author of "A Muggle's Guide to Harry > Potter") in which she says she expects Harry to continue throwing > temper tantrums in the next books. Whilst I don't think Harry will > give up his angst that easily, I think it would be thematically > better (and more representative of real-life coping) for Harry to > act down, depressed and hopeless, not still angry. >> snip > I think the determination to fight Voldemort to the death and to > accept his place in the prophecy should come only after Harry has > surrendered to it all. I think for Harry to give up his strong > Gryffindor traits of bravery and courage for a period of time will > make his final battle with Voldemort much more powerful. He isn't > brave and courageous because he has some innate inborn quality- he > > has to *choose* to use it. > > > Alla: > > Very interesting post. Even though I don't want Harry to become pre- > OOP Harry, I am with you here - I don't think we 'll see always > angry Harry in HBP. > > Yes, I think we'll see depressed and grieving Harry, but again > this "he will have to master his emotions in order to be useful" > quote > makes me wonder how long this stage will last. > > Unfortunately I don't think that Jo will allow Harry to doubt his > destiny for a long time. I will be glad if it will last a couple of > chapters. > > Like maybe he will decide to give up one thing - Quidditch for > example and then some kind of disaster strikes and Harry is back to > the rescue. Too bad though, I would love him to doubt his destiny. > > But I am telling you - I like your interpretation MUCH better than > mine prediction and I will be incredibly happy if yours will be > correct. > > Yes, Harry has to choose his courage and I agree - to win over > Voldemort Harry has to stop being afraid of death (maybe he WILL > travel to underworld after all). I think not being afraid of death > will help him survive at the end. > > It will be fun, if Harry lets Snape insults go unanswered for a > while, but then finally explodes. > > In any event, I don't believe that JKR will take it as far as > turning Harry in Malfoy's clone. She is too adamant in drawing > distinction between them . :o) imamommy: I would expect the boy to display the classic five steps of grief: shock, denial, anger/bargaining, depression, and acceptance. These are the five steps people go through when something else traumatic happens to them. Each of these steps is essential to mental health for the individual. So, at the end of OoP, we definitely see Harry in shock. We will probably see him either in the denial or anger/bargaining phase at the beginning of HBP, and over the course of the sixth and seventh book, see him progress throughdepression to eventual acceptance. I hope we get to see him in denial for a while before anger, so there is a contrast with his mood for much of OoP. I also agree that he needs to go through a depressed, "I don't give a flying ferret" time. Lots of teenagers with less baggage than Harry's got go through this. Often this kind of depression causes a falling out with old friends, and hanging around new friends who tend to have a demoralizing effect on the teenager. I don't see Harry chumming up to Draco & Co., but is there anyone else he could escape to as a departure from Ron and Hermione? Theodore Nott, perhaps? I think he will withdraw from Hermione especially for a time. She tends to be his voice of reason and conscience, and I think he will want to escape that voice for awhile. imamommy From imamommy at sbcglobal.net Thu Dec 9 05:18:49 2004 From: imamommy at sbcglobal.net (imamommy at sbcglobal.net) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 05:18:49 -0000 Subject: Lupin, Snape and Potions (was Re: Is Snape really THAT good in Potions?( In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119556 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > > > > Neri: > > If I remember my canon right, the little of what we know about > > Lupin's brewing abilities comes from the same passage in PoA that > (I > > still maintain, in the absence of counter-examples) is our sole > > direct canon for Snape's brewing abilities. > > Potioncat: > I agree, that the only character who ever speaks about Snape's skill > at potions is Lupin. Now, if the reader feels Lupin is pretty much > trustworthy, the reader will believe him. If the reader feels he is > ESE or just not trustworthy, the reader will reserve judgement. I > will have to say that I am enough of a hypocrit to believe Lupin is > correct about Snape, but may not be telling the truth about himself. > > > Neri: > snip > > It is reasonable to suppose that Lupin completed a Potions NEWT > with > > a good grade: he is intelligent, was probably a good student (a > > prefect and a "good boy" who started studying for the > Transfiguration > > OWL minutes after getting out of the DADA exam) and he had a > strong > > study group. He also has the disposition for Potions: quiet, > patient, > > subtle and motivated. In fact, in the Pensive scene 15 yrs old > Remus > > seems to be more patient and subtle than 15 yrs old Severus. imamommy: Snape speaks for himself in a very indirect way. He tells Harry that the same weaknesses that make him sloppy in potions are making him sloppy in Occlumency. Snape, whatever his faults, does (imo) act very methodically in most instances. Notice when he gets angry, rather than yelling, he gets quieter. It is rare that he gets upset; usually he gets revenge. Now, I'm not trying to say that Snape isn't a grouchy git who needs to get over his issues, but my point is that he tends to be very calculating, very methodical, dare I say anal? about many things. He knows about the gillyweed and boomslang skin pretty quickly, I would guess because he keeps his cupboard well organized. Potions making is, in my little Suzy Homemaker's brain, a lot like cooking or a sewing project. Miss one seemingly small step, forget one ingredient, put fabric together backwards, and suddenly you've got a big problem. Only with potions it seems to be very difficult,if not impossible to fix something once it's gone wrong. So my point is that while we don't hear from others very often about Snapes potion-making abilities, I would conjecture from his behaviour that he would have an aptitude for the methodical planning involved in potions. imamommy From imamommy at sbcglobal.net Thu Dec 9 05:48:27 2004 From: imamommy at sbcglobal.net (imamommy at sbcglobal.net) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 05:48:27 -0000 Subject: Hermione's Patonus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119557 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mcmaxslb" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > > > > On IMDB there is a bit of a trivia contest going on. One of the > > questions was: What form does Hermionie's patronus take? Of course > > we know that it's an otter. Another person added that Ron lives in > > Ottery St. Catchpole, possibly as a clue to a R/H ship....Steve, > > > > > > Hermione's otter patronus has nothing to do with any possable R/Hr > ship(ick). The otter is JKR's favorite animal and that is why it is > Hermione's patronus. imamommy: Curious what Hermione's patronus had to say for her, here's a bit I looked up on otters: River otters are very intelligent and very curious. Scientists have found they have a remarkable memory. They are able to do a lot with their front paws, even manipulating very small objects. River otters love to travel. They can have a home range of anywhere from 5 miles to 47 miles from "home". River otters are aquatic but may travel several miles over land to reach another stream or lake. They are very sociable animals and usually travel together in groups of two or more. The body of the River Otter is tapered so they can swim through the water without any resistance. Their head is small and tapers into its neck and their body is slender and sleek. The tail is thick and tapering. The otter is very flexible. Some people thought the otters didn't have bones, only cartilage. They can roll up in a ball and have their nose touch their tail. They make many different sounds. They chatter, chuckle, grunt, snort, and growl. They also warn other otters of danger with a shrill whistle. ********************************************************************* The "highly intelligent" sounds like Hermione, as does alerting others to danger with a "shrill whistle." Cheers! imamommy who wonders if Hermione's otter has anything to do with Ron, does that mean Harry will be going to the next ball "stag"? From senderellabrat at aol.com Thu Dec 9 07:21:24 2004 From: senderellabrat at aol.com (Sen J) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 07:21:24 -0000 Subject: Hermione's Patonus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119558 Steve: > Who is now wondering why Ron didn't know who Luna was before when > she lives so close by. Me: *coming out of lurkdom probably a bit late for this post* I don't think it's very wierd. Molly homeschooled and with that many children, it's not like he was in need of someone to play with. For some reason also, it seems to me, during GOF,the Weasleys were walking quite a distance to the Portkey spot. I also had the feeling (just how my mind interpreted the story) the Diggorys had a bit of a walk too. In my mind it seems all of the houses in their "neighborhood" are very far apart and a parent of a child under 11 (pre-Hogwarts) may not allow them to walk that far of a distance alone. I know I know.. Floo Powder... but I just don't think they had the opportunity to meet having lived so far away from each other. I also think Luna's father may have taken her with him to work and on whatever crumpled snorkak like escapades because of her mother not being around. *IF* Ron & Luna had had a chance to meet even in passing, I don't think Ron would've been interested in hanging out with her and just didn't give her a thought after that. I know.. very little cannon... just how my mind interpreted the story. Sen From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 9 07:28:06 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 07:28:06 -0000 Subject: Wand intelligence? (was: Harry's Protection) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119559 Alla wrote: > > Welcome, Annette! Yes, the "wands chooses the wizard" sounds > intriguing to me too. > > I don't remember details on last discussion of this topic, but I do > remember that some list members opinion was that Mr. Olivander > exaggerated (again, I apologise, I don't remember other opinions). > > I believe that there is at least some truth in his statement - > meaning that wands DO have if not intelligence, than at least some > independent magical energy, put into them by their makers. > My speculation is that when this energy is on the same wave as any > particular witch or wizard's magical energy, or signature, or > magical core , then wand chooses them. > > I don't know if I would go that far as saying that wands did the > choosing as part of the prophecy though, mainly because I believe > that we are about to get a big surprise as how prophecy will be > fulfilled. Carol notes: Just a quick addendum here. I think the combination of cores and woods is important; otherwise, Mr. Ollivander wouldn't remember every wand he ever made in such detail. Some wands are more powerful than others (James's first wand was more powerful than Lily's; Tom Riddle's is probably the most powerful wand Mr. Ollivander ever made or sold, with Harry's, with a core from the same Phoenix, a close second. Also, Lily's wand is " a nice wand for Charm work" while James's is more suited to Transfiguration. it seems clear that the wands recognized those talents in those particular children and "chose" them for that reason. Neville, I'm sure, will do better with his own wand than he ever did with his father's. Also, Mr. Ollivander uses only three "powerful magical substances" as cores (unicorn tail hairs, Phoenix feathers, and dragon heart strings), which seems like a limited selection (he deliberately excludes Veela hairs as "too temperamental"), but he points out that every Phoenix (or unicorn or dragon) is different from every other, and the variety of woods (maple oak, holly, and yew being the ones I remember, but I'm sure there are many others) would lend additional variety and individuality to the wands, so that they're as distinctive as fingerprints. If you look at Druid mythology, you can see that different woods have different symbolism or different properties. The folklorists on the list can probably talk about the qualities associated with unicorns (innocence?), Phoenixes (immortality) and dragons (dunno). (The length of a wand may help determine power, or it may simply relate to the size of the person, but I don't want to get into that.) At any rate, the composition of a wand is clearly important in terms of its suitability to a particular wizard, and it's no accident that both Harry and Voldemort's wands have a shared Phoenix feather core, or that they're made of holly and yew, respectively. To get back to the original point, I think wands can do more than "choose the wizard." In the hands of a powerful wizard, whther it's Dumbledore or Snape or Dolohov, they can respond to a *silent* command. IIRC, Harry's wand comes when he calls it in OoP. So, yes, I think that wands are sentient, that they know their owners, and that they respond (like Harry's Firebolt) to the desire or will of their owners, which is one reason why not only power but the desire to hurt or kill or control is important in an Unforgiveable Curse. The wand senses the desire (and the power) and responds accordingly. It isn't a mere conduit responding only to words, or a five-year-old who was mad at his mother could pick up her wand and AK her. Carol, who probably hasn't put her thoughts in the best orderand may have made some ludicrous typos but just wants to finish reading the posts and go to bed From afiveouncebird at yahoo.com Thu Dec 9 08:12:36 2004 From: afiveouncebird at yahoo.com (afiveouncebird) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 08:12:36 -0000 Subject: Snape's evolution (was: Snape's Karma) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119560 Betsy said: > >I think the ultimate of karmic justice would be for Snape and Harry >(and maybe Lupin too?) to gain a certain amount of respect for each >other. I don't need them to go skipping off into the sunset >together, the best of friends, but civility would be nice. Instead >of some great act of goodness I think Snape needs to let go of his >old hatred of James and finally work with Harry. Like an adult >would do. (Obviously, Harry needs to work through his hatred of >Snape too. And I think the very irrationality of his hatred of Snape >at the end of OOP hints towards some sort of reconciliation -- or >maybe a duel to the death *eg*. But I predict growth for Harry and >healing for Snape.) Afob: Personally, I see Snape as a rather static character and would be disappointed with this type of resolution. We may find out more about his past but I don't see him evolving as a character in this way. He and Malfoy are too important as contrasting characters for Dumbledore, the trio, etc. I am certain, however, we will find out why Dumbledore trusts Snape and all the events surrounding that issue. -Afob From ConstanceVigilance at gmail.com Thu Dec 9 09:05:47 2004 From: ConstanceVigilance at gmail.com (Susan Miller) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 09:05:47 -0000 Subject: FILK: The Hogwarts Hannukah Song Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119561 The first solo for Anthony Goldstein! Dedicated to Pippin To the "tune" (such as it is) of Adam Sandler's The Hanukkah Song. http://www.ilovewavs.com/Holidays/Hanukkah/hanukkah.htm The Hogwarts Hanukkah Song Wearing my yalmulka, at Hogwarts for Hanukkah Let's get harmonic-kah and sing out for Hanukkah! The Great Hall has twelve fairy-lighted trees But how about one menorrah, Headmaster, pretty please? When you feel like the only kid in town without a Christmas tree, Here's a list of wizards who are Jewish, just like you and me: You should visit Madam Malkin, for robes without peer, And also Cassandra Vablatsky, the celebrated seer. Bertie Botts whose Every Flavours make each day a bit sweeter Josef Wronski who feinted and most likely Rita Skeeter. [1] Oswald Beamish, who pioneered goblin rights [2] Was probably one who celebrated Eight Crazy Nights. You don't need Deck the Halls although Jingle Bells works But you can buy and sell goods at Borgin and Burke's (spoken:both Jewish!) Nicolas Flamel wasn't Jewish in history, But without Abraham the Jew, the Stone would still be a mystery. [3] One guy who most likely has a 6-point star under his cape Is our dark-featured hook-nosed Professor Severus Snape! Perhaps Hannah Abbott, but her beau Ernie Macmillan I'm sure, would convert before they ever have chillen. [4] And then there's Ms Brocklehurst whose first name is Mandy She's a Ravenclaw who could be a Jew and that's dandy. Jews in the pop group Weird Sisters of show biz-- Orsino Thruston isn't Jewish, but maybe lead singer Myron Wagtail is. Tell your friend Hermione-kah, its time you celebrate Hanukkah I hope I don't sound whiny-kah, on this lovely, lovely Hanukkah. Jews Muggle and Magical marry outside the blood long since But don't you wonder about the blood of the Half-Blood Prince? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ [1] Ok, so her name isn't remotely Jewish, but she reminds me so much of Joan Rivers I made a jump. [2] So many civil rights pioneers are Jewish that I made another assumption. [3] Abraham the Jew was essential in translating the tablets that led to the development of the Philosoper's Stone. See http://www.alchemylab.com/flamel.htm [4] I apologize. ~Constance Vigilance From eloiseherisson at aol.com Thu Dec 9 09:14:05 2004 From: eloiseherisson at aol.com (eloise_herisson) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 09:14:05 -0000 Subject: The Flamel story (was:The Philospher's Stone (was: Harry's Protection )) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119562 Jen: > Yes, I was re-thinking this one myself. Except if Flamel was a > real person, someone or some book would have a picture of him and > put two-and-two together. (Or not, if it servs JKR's purposes, I > guess.) Eloise: Like this one? http://www.crystalinks.com/flamel.gif (It's also in the Lexicon) Possibly a passing resemblence. This is part of what the site containing that image (and Flamel's biography) says, "There is nothing legendary about the life of Nicolas Flamel. The Bibliotheque Nationale in Paris contains works copied in his own hand and original works written by him. All the official documents relating to his life have been found: his marriage contract, his deeds of gift, his will." www.crystalinks.com/ flamel.html (Long biography, well worth reading.) Perhaps this is the problem. Perhaps he's regarded as too much part of the Muggle world, a Muggle alchemist, rather than a true wizard. That could be why he doesn't appear to have a famous wizard card of his own. Perhaps the whole Philosopher's Stone thing is regarded as a Muggle myth. If no-one in the WW until Voldemort actually believed in the thing, it would explain a lot. In fact, after Flamel's death his house was the focus of great attention as there was a rumour that he had left great stores of gold there. I have to say that I think the "nothing legendary" bit is an exaggeration; he is clearly a well-documented, historical person, but there is a lot of interpretation in the biography. Interestingly, it appears that Flamel, just as Jen intimated, had no regard for the material benefits bestowed by the Philosopher's Stone "At the same time that he was learning how to make gold out of any material, he acquired the wisdom of despising it in his heart...He knew that man attains immortality only through the victory of spirit over matter, by essential purification, by the transmutation of the human into the divine." The biography actually states that he kept the secret to himself as, "he knew that the revelation of the secret to an undeveloped soul only increased the imperfection of that soul." Nor did he exploit the money making opportunities of the Stone: "Though he knew how to make gold, Nicolas Flamel made it only three times in the whole of his life and then, not for himself, for he never changed his way of life; he did it only to mitigate the evils that he saw around him." I am now struck by how all this meshes in with what we've been discussing. Flamel apparently embraced the idea of death and had his tombstone made in advance. However in the 17th century, a French savant sent by Louis XIV to study antiquities in the East reported meeting one of a group of seven philosophers who travelled the world, meeting just once every twenty years. This philosopher claimed that the average human life should be 1000 years, but that the sages kept the knowledge to themselves. He claimed in addition that Flamel and his wife were still alive and living in India; their funerals had been shams. So again we have this contrast between the apparent acceptance of death and the actual prolongation of it via the Elixir of Life. It seems these contradictory themes which we've been discussing aren't quite so odd after all, or at least are firmly embedded in the story of Nicolas Flamel. ~Eloise From olivier.fouquet+harry at m4x.org Thu Dec 9 10:39:59 2004 From: olivier.fouquet+harry at m4x.org (olivier.fouquet+harry at m4x.org) Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 11:39:59 +0100 Subject: Sexuality as a theme in HP (long) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119563 Some read HP books as mysteries, other like to see them as of the adventure and fantasy genre, and some as fairy-tales. There are even readers that see in them deep christian or symbolic meaning. In this post, I try to explore the way I read them: as the journey from boyhood to manhood, with an explicit reference to sexuality. Just as a forewarning, I insist that the following will deal with adult theme. Other posts on this subjects include #47966, #83372, #101297 and #101335. PS/SS Let us briefly review the story line of HP with this topic in mind. Harry is an orphan living in an abusive loveless family in which he knows he will never fit. He has always been odd, and there are mysteries surrounding his parents. Eventually, he discovers that all the oddities are explained by the "simple" fact he is a wizard, and that means for him a complete reversal of his life. An important theme in PS is Harry's quest for his parents, and more precisely his father. He discovers with pleasure and pride that his father was an extremely talented and well-liked wizard, that he was an outstanding Quidditch player (just like himself) and that all in all they look incredibly alike. I think that already in PS, the more children book of all, the pervasive theme of sexuality is already present. First, note that the most unambiguous sign that Harry is a wizard is his freeing of a snake. A snake that was bred in captivity at that. This snake is described as able to "crush [Uncle Vernon's] car into a trash can." So, a powerful snake which could surpass Vernon (Harry's only paternal figure at the time), held in a cage, and freed by Harry. I think the symbolic meaning is quite clear. I want to expand a bit on Harry's identification with his father by quickly reviewing a tale-telling scene: Harry's first nightly try of his father's cloak. Harry cannot find sleep because of the mystery surrounding the cloak. So he pulls the cloak out from under his bed and tries it. It was "smoother than silk, lighter than air," but first and foremost, it's "his father's... this had been his father's". Harry tries it on and immediately "excitement flooded into him." Putting the cloak on has awakened in Harry the feeling that he too could become a man, just like his father. Before moving to CoS, I would like to speak a bit about two important characters with respect to sexuality: Filch and Snape. Filch is pretty simple to understand. He is the embodiment of the repressive forces of childhood trying to suppress the awakening of sexuality. If only for this reason, his role is bound to disappear (Filch's name occurs 52 times in PS and only 66 times in the three times longer OoP). Significantly, as early as CoS we discover that Filch is himself not a wizard, i.e he is himself deprived of manhood and sexuality. Snape is a much more complex character. I suspect he represents the more scaring and disturbing part of sexuality: its darkest, usually repressed, aspects. Here follows some hints that he could be so. He is ugly (in sharp contrast with James, the shining young man, he is strongly associated with black and dark). He teaches Potion (and specifically tells his first-year students that he will teach them "the delicate power of liquids that creep through human veins", no wonder Neville destroys his cauldron), thereby emphasizing he will deal with fluids. He resides in a dark, creepy and cold dungeon. But more on that later. CoS I have already covered in long details the numerous evidence that sexuality is a major theme in CoS, especially in post #83372. For the sake of completeness, I would like to come back to the Polyjuice incident. Hermione breaks into Snape's office, steals some ingredients from him to prepare a potion that will change her in to someone else. Alas, things don't go as well as planned and Hermione ends up locking herself in a deserted toilet, desperately not wanting her boy friends to see her, and with a lot of hairs. If one accepts that Snape psychological role is to embody the disturbing aspects of sexuality, this whole story is (in my opinion) a very nice and tactful description of a girl first menstruation. There are really to many things to discuss about CoS, so I refer to 83372 and move on. PoA PoA, like CoS, is also incredibly concerned with sexuality. Harry's story in this book is his search for a sound and healthy vision of his future sexuality. In other words, what kind of father will he be? Will he be able to choose the path of his father, the powerful, shining fatherly figure that he aspires to emulate (expecting patronum) or will he linger in the depressive memories of his now lost childhood (thus yielding to the power of the Dementors)? Many scenes in PoA have a symbolic meaning, I will give some examples. The Patronus charm itself is a pretty vivid metaphor for, well, you know. Or if you don't, consider the very first patronus Harry ever produces, "Something whooshed suddenly out of the end of his wand; it looked like a wisp of silvery gas" and the last "out of the end of his wand burst, not a shapeless cloud of mist, but a blinding, dazzling, silver animal." The Patronus charm is not the only direct reference to sexual activity in PoA, there are of course Harry's insides which reacts when he sees Cho, but also this strange dream: "He had a very strange dream. He was walking through a forest, his Firebolt over his shoulder, following something silvery-white. It was winding its way through the trees ahead, and he could only catch glimpses of it between the leaves. Anxious to catch up with it, he sped up, but as he moved faster, so did his quarry. Harry broke into a run, and ahead he heard hooves gathering speed. Now he was running flat out, and ahead he could hear galloping. Then he turned a corner into a clearing and..." Now, if one looks at the symbolic and thematic object in this dream, one may conclude that Harry is having here on of this very first, well, patronus manifestation. But most important than the scenes themselves are the characters in PoA. It is in this book that we first discover about Harry's parents generation. Unsurprisingly (considering it is the story of a boy looking for manhood), it seems at first this generation is entirely masculine. James thematic role we have already spoken about, he is the embodiment of an accepted sexuality, both powerful, protective and responsible. Sirius represents the rawest sexual impulses. He is (according to JKR) the "sexiest, most dangerous marauder" who had escaped from a prison no-one had ever left before and that no-one (even Dumbledore) seems to be able to catch or stop. Snape's role in PoA expands greatly (his name occurs 246 in PoA, in comparison with 98 times in CoS and 256 in GoF, which is more than a hundred pages longer). This is in accordance with our previous characterization of him. As Harry discovers all the aspects of sexuality, it is necessary that the disturbing aspects appears all the more vividly. Remark that Snape was "always trying to know what [the others] were about." A hint that indeed he's a symbol for shame and guilt regarding sexual affairs. Particularly interesting is the confrontation between Sirius and Snape. As opposite forces, they of course hate themselves and would be more than happy to destroy each other. Note that Sirius tries to destroy Snape by sending him to a werewolf, that is repressed sexual forces gone wild. Lupin's role is also clear. He is a remainder that sexual forces are too powerful to be tamed, they must be accepted and may be domesticated (the stag bows to Harry) but they also are a tremendous threat. Isabelle Smadja, a french author, has theorized that Lupin could also represent, well, pedophile tendencies. She interprets in that sense the infamous event where "Lupin made a sudden motion with his arm as though to grip Harry's shoulder, but thought better of it." As she sees it, Lupin knows all too well that his sexuality is not entirely safe, so he tries to contain his impulse as best as he can. GoF GoF is both more and less concerned about sexuality than the first books. It is the very first one where sexual themes are explicitly touched, with characters flirting. On the other hand, the symbolic and psychological aspects of sexuality are rather less touched (unless I have missed them). Still, there are at least two interesting situation to explore. One is the graveyard scene (which can be seen as a rape) and the other is the psyche of Barty Crouch Junior. I think an argument can be made that Barty Junior has such a troubled mind because he never resolved his oedipal desires for his mother. But I don't want to expand on that for now. The important thing to notice is that after a book concerned solely about manhood (PoA), GoF introduces woman. Important for later is the fact that we first encounter "a woman with thick, shining dark hair and heavily hooded eyes, who was sitting in the chained chair as though it were a throne," the gorgeous and terrible Mrs. Lestrange. OoP OoP fully explores the tendency set by GoF: feminine aspects of sexuality. It is in this book that Harry looses both his male referents (Dumbledore and the imaginary father he has found in PoA), that Sirius dies, and that women suddenly jump in the front scene. Very important is the whole Occlumency question. For the very first time in the series, Harry confronts Snape face to face, the aim for Harry being (in perfect accordance to Snape's role so far) to learn to bottle in his most violent emotions. There follows very interesting scenes where Snape dives deep into Harry's subconscious memories and feelings. Not surprisingly, Harry violently resents Snape's intrusion in his relationship with Cho (this makes him throw a spell at Snape). Snape's role as the embodiment of the problematic, traumatic aspects of sexuality is nowhere more fleshed out in the whole series that in those scenes. Of course, when Harry gets a glimpse at Snape's memories, he discovers exactly what we would have expected: troubled childhood and adolescence, uneasy relations with girls (the image of Snape being mocked by a girl for his failure to "mount" a "broomstick" carries some very uneasy remembrances for many teenage boy) and sexual humiliation of the worst kind inflicted by the two most popular boys of the school. Definitely, Snape was not the right person to teach Harry to control his sexual desires (half of Harry definitely wants to know what mysteries Snape is trying to hide). Fatherly advices about sex should have been Dumbledore's job, as he recognizes later. Anyway, Occlumency predictably fails, and as a result Harry is fooled by his impulses. Sirius then dies at the hand of Bellatrix, i.e raw sexual forces turn into self-destructive violent trauma. __________________________________ Such a reading of HP brings many conclusion. I find it most of the time interesting to try to understand the characters action in terms of their symbolic role rather from purely logical motives. For instance, it is in my opinion quite vain (though fun) to argue ad nauseam whether Harry or Snape is responsible for the failure of Occlumency. Repressive, traumatic sexuality does not do well to fifteen-year-old, it was bound to fail. Likewise, there are really no end to the debate whether Snape is a good teacher or not, or whether Snape is a monster or the real hero of the story. Snape is not only a teacher, he is a symbol of something deeply rooted in a sane mind: some kind of uneasiness towards sexuality. Most of what he does and says can be related to this. I suspect that most of the debate between Snape haters and Snape worshippers (or even shippers) reflects more the inner posture of the reader towards this uneasiness than anything in canon. JKR herself warned her girl readers not to fall for it. The same could be said of the sudden reversal of James image in OoP, or about the Prank. I am not sure it is fruitful to try to figure out if Snape might have "deserved" it one way or another. I'd rather try to read between the lines what it means psychologically. Many thanks to anyone who has read until here. Olivier From carolynwhite2 at aol.com Thu Dec 9 11:25:19 2004 From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (carolynwhite2) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 11:25:19 -0000 Subject: Sexuality as a theme in HP (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119564 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, olivier.fouquet+harry at m... wrote: I'd rather try to read between > the lines what it means psychologically. > > > Many thanks to anyone who has read until here. > > Olivier Olivier, what a thoughtful post. I hope it generates adult discussion. I'd just like to add a point that has always struck me every time that I read the books - the sexual imagery of the entrance to the Gryffindor common room. It is necessary for the children to climb through a hole behind the fat lady, into a warm, round womb-like room, decorated in warm reds. It is noticeable how often Neville has difficulty with this, but Ron and Harry are cool and confident with her - often leading her to complain 'are you going to leave me hanging wide open ?'. This aspect was sanitised in the films, as with so much else - after all, it would be so much easier for a portrait to simply open like a door for them to walk through. However, JKR didn't choose that option in the books, consciously or not, I don't know. Carolyn From naama_gat at hotmail.com Thu Dec 9 11:36:42 2004 From: naama_gat at hotmail.com (naamagatus) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 11:36:42 -0000 Subject: Sirius & Remus post-Hogwarts (was: Snape and McGonagall) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119565 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Renee" wrote: > > Of course, if we hear that James and Lily also suspected Remus, >this second interpretation becomes invalid. > Isn't it practically canon that they suspected Lupin? By the very fact that they accepted Peter as SK we can tell that, by default, Lupin was the only one left for them to suspect. And they had to suspect, since DD *told* them that someone close to them was a spy for Voldemort. Naama From willsonkmom at msn.com Thu Dec 9 12:35:23 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 12:35:23 -0000 Subject: Sexuality as a theme in HP (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119566 Carolyn wrote: > Olivier, what a thoughtful post. I hope it generates adult discussion. > > I'd just like to add a point that has always struck me every time > that I read the books - the sexual imagery of the entrance to the > Gryffindor common room. It is necessary for the children to climb > through a hole behind the fat lady, into a warm, round womb-like > room, decorated in warm reds. It is noticeable how often Neville has > difficulty with this, but Ron and Harry are cool and confident with > her - often leading her to complain 'are you going to leave me > hanging wide open ?'. > > This aspect was sanitised in the films, as with so much else - after > all, it would be so much easier for a portrait to simply open like a > door for them to walk through. However, JKR didn't choose that option > in the books, consciously or not, I don't know. > Potioncat: Interesting point...and of course fits with McGonagall having to struggle to get into the common room. So, how does the Slytherin common room fit into this theme, or does it? And do you see any connection to Gryffindor and Ravenclaw common rooms being in towers and Slytherin and Hufflepuff being below ground? From fkilc at yahoo.com Thu Dec 9 11:33:45 2004 From: fkilc at yahoo.com (fkilc) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 11:33:45 -0000 Subject: Who is Mr Prentice? In-Reply-To: <20041208204528.55291.qmail@web53109.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119567 Juli wrote: > ..... > Oh, it's just Mr Prentice > don't put your wand away, boy, don't I keep telling > you I'm no use?' (OoP, Ch 2, A Peck of Owls) > > This happens right after Harry and Dudley are attacked > by dementors. My question is Who is Mr Prentice? Is he > a muggle, a Squib, a wizard? My guess is he's either a > squib or a wizard, why else would Mrs Figg allow him > to see Harry with a wand? Thoughts anyone? I always thought that he's nothing more than just a "random muggle"... ;-) -Francois From greatelderone at yahoo.com Thu Dec 9 14:34:45 2004 From: greatelderone at yahoo.com (greatelderone) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 14:34:45 -0000 Subject: Hermione's Patonus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119568 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > > > > Steve here: > > Well that clears up why Hermione's patronus is an otter. But what > about the > > references to other otter related animals around the Burrow? > > > > Steve > > > > > Potioncat: > Aren't ferrets part of the otter/weasel family? > Potioncat GEO: Exactly using this line of reasoning you might as well connect her to Malfoy, the only person that JKR has said on the record that she wouldn't pair Hermione up with. From willsonkmom at msn.com Thu Dec 9 14:43:25 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 14:43:25 -0000 Subject: ferrets and weasels (was Re: Hermione's Patonus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119569 > > Potioncat: > > Aren't ferrets part of the otter/weasel family? > > Potioncat > > GEO: Exactly using this line of reasoning you might as well connect her to Malfoy, the only person that JKR has said on the record that she wouldn't pair Hermione up with. Potioncat: But I wonder if it will more closely tie the Weasley family and the Malfoy family. I've suspected there is a back story to Arthur and Lucius' animosity. From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Thu Dec 9 15:21:18 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 15:21:18 -0000 Subject: The Philospher's Stone (was: Harry's Protection (was Re: Questions)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119570 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "eloise_herisson" wrote: snips all over the place > Eloise: > It also crosses my mind to wonder now whether the Philosopher's Stone > has any connection with Harry's parents' wealth, another secret which > we've been promised we'll find out about later. > > Kneasy: Hmm. James and Lily knocking off bootleg Galleons in Godric's Hollow. Voldy as Revenue enforcer protecting the bank accounts of the rich and previleged against raging inflation. Could be fun. > Eloise: > I think a belief in the immortality of the soul is hinted at, both in > Dumbledore's own stated philosophy on death and in the concept of the > Dementor's Kiss being worse than death itself. If soul sucking result > merely in oblivion, then I don't see that it can really be worse than > death except for the people who have to deal with the empty shell > left behind. It implies a loss of that essence which makes one human > and can pass on to another existence. > > Kneasy: I have a bit of a problem with Dementors - fitting them into JKR's cosmology, I mean. What are they, where did they come from and what's in it for them? Why would they want to suck souls? Are they trained to be psychic vacuum cleaners or is it an inherrent trait? And what is a souless person anyway? The closest I've managed to get is a zombie - they needn't be dead, they're often considered as normal people who've had their soul stolen by a spell. They can be re-animated bodies - something I suggested Crouch Snr's bone might be used for. They're also a well-known denizen of the horror/fantasy genre - yet we've seen neither hide, nor hair of 'em so far. I'll try to remain optimistic and hope they turn up before the end. Harry faced by hordes of the undead - well isn't that why JKR wanted a graveyard at Hogwarts? > > Eloise: > I can live with that and the rest of your theory, but my problem is > why Dumbledore had that opportunity. *Why* hadn't Voldemort already > seized bodily immortality via the Stone. > > Kneasy: Good question. Any wizard researching immortality would hit references to the Stone immediately. Discussed and speculated about for centuries even in the Muggle World. Any wizard worth his salt would know about it. And being such a tight society there's no way the Flamels would have escaped notice. That's why I offered the two theories - he hadn't heard of them because nobody else had either - it was an invented tale. Or he was afraid to approach them. Suppose Nick Flamel was the most powerful wizard in the world - DD for instance, and Voldy knew it. Then his search for alternative methods would be credible. But without evidence it's guesswork. > > Eloise: > I'm not sure that (as Jen suggested) his having embraced immortality > for some while makes his speeches on the subject of death > hypocritical as according to this theory by the end of PS/SS (if not > before) he has decided either that immortality isn't all it's cracked > up to be, or else that the job with which he was entrusted was coming > to an end (I hate to draw the analogy again, but like the knight > guarding the Grail). One thing Dumbledore doesn't claim to be is > infallible; he could easily be expressing regret at what he himself > has done. > Kneasy: I agree. I don't consider his speeches hypocritical either. Sneaky, evasive, manipulative - yes. Hypocritical - no. Besides, if we accept Jo's premises (that top-ups are required) then DD never became immortal - he just prolongs his natural span until either the elixir runs out or he decides to swear off the hard stuff. But there's a third option - the Merlin Scenario; the sleeping guardian. If, as I've wondered previously, this battle between good and evil has been going on for centuries - with the Voldy Wars being the latest expression of it, then DD could be charged with returning to lead the fight when he's needed. Good, standard mythology. From R.Vink2 at chello.nl Thu Dec 9 15:30:01 2004 From: R.Vink2 at chello.nl (Renee) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 15:30:01 -0000 Subject: Sirius & Remus post-Hogwarts (was: Snape and McGonagall) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119571 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "naamagatus" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Renee" wrote: > > > > > Of course, if we hear that James and Lily also suspected Remus, > >this second interpretation becomes invalid. > > > > Isn't it practically canon that they suspected Lupin? By the very > fact that they accepted Peter as SK we can tell that, by default, > Lupin was the only one left for them to suspect. And they had to > suspect, since DD *told* them that someone close to them was a spy > for Voldemort. > > Naama Renee: Yes, but I was wondering if they suspected them independently of Sirius, or just because Sirius argued he was suspect, and why. From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Thu Dec 9 15:48:20 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 15:48:20 -0000 Subject: Sexuality as a theme in HP (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119572 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, olivier.fouquet+harry at m... wrote: > Some read HP books as mysteries, other like to see them as of the > adventure and fantasy genre, and some as fairy-tales. There are even > readers that see in them deep christian or symbolic meaning. In this > post, I try to explore the way I read them: as the journey from boyhood > to manhood, with an explicit reference to sexuality. Just as a > forewarning, I insist that the following will deal with adult theme. > Other posts on this subjects include #47966, #83372, #101297 and > #101335. > snip> Interesting indeed.... I won't dispute with the symbology nor the logic. The choice and use of each is the prerogative of the one presenting the argument. But.... This is (one of) your interpretations of HP. Do you think that this symbology is part of the authors intention from the outset or could it be an unconscious, accidental or unintentional theme on her part? Or even an inevitability given that it follows a boy through adolescence to adulthood? Kneasy From foxmoth at qnet.com Thu Dec 9 15:53:34 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 15:53:34 -0000 Subject: Lupin, Snape and Potions (was Re: Is Snape really THAT good in Potions?( In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119573 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > Neri: > snip > > It is reasonable to suppose that Lupin completed a Potions NEWT with a good grade: he is intelligent, was probably a good student (a prefect and a "good boy" who started studying for the Transfiguration OWL minutes after getting out of the DADA exam) and he had a strong study group. He also has the disposition for Potions: quiet, patient, subtle and motivated. In fact, in the Pensive scene 15 yrs old Remus seems to be more patient and subtle than 15 yrs old Severus. For all we know, he could have got a better grade in his Potions NEWT than Snape did. > > Potioncat: > I don't think it is reasonable to think Lupin took Potions after OWL level. I don't doubt that if he did take it, he did well at it. But I don't think we have any idea what he took. No, I take that back. I'll bet he took DADA. I think he took Charms and Transfigurations. I'm basing that on what I think we've see him doing at Hogwarts and at GP. > > I would bet that neither James nor Sirius took Potions and that in itself may have kept Remus out of it. Or he may have avoided Potions to avoid Severus. < Pippin: Or Severus took NEWT potions to avoid Remus, Sirius and James. I think I have found additional reason to think Lupin would have a problem with potions. Snape coments on his lack of organization. If true, that would make Lupin a poor potion maker. There's certainly independent evidence of disorganized!Lupin in canon--the whole fiasco at the end of PoA. Even if you believe that Lupin didn't *actually* forget to take his potion and keep track of when he was going to transform, his lack of organization is what makes it credible that he might have done so. There's also the problem that polyjuice, for example, requires ingredients picked at the full moon and veritaserum requires tending for a full moon cycle. Lupin's illness would make him unsuited for a job that required him to make such potions, so why take the course? I also have the feeling that the potions curriculum is becoming obsolete and that is one of the reasons Snape keeps angling for the DADA job. In pre-industrial times, many households made their own preparations: soaps, dyes, pickles, medicines and of course beverages. Nowadays they're all available commercially and only hobbyists and professionals need learn the details of how they're made. Skele-Gro, Mrs.Skours, and Sleek-easy all seem to be brand names, so a similar development could be occuring in the WW. It could be that the Marauders saw no reason to bother with the subject, unless they were planning to be Aurors or Healers, and there's no canon for that. If James had been an Auror, surely someone would have mentioned it to Harry by now. Pippin From candlekicks at yahoo.ca Thu Dec 9 15:54:36 2004 From: candlekicks at yahoo.ca (candlekicks) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 15:54:36 -0000 Subject: Angry Harry in HBP? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119574 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, imamommy at s... wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" > wrote: > > > > Laurasia wrote: > > An article in today's paper (Sydney Morning Herald, Dec 9 2004: > > http://smh.com.au/articles/2004/12/08/1102182348990.html ) had a > few > > comments from Fiona Boyle (author of "A Muggle's Guide to Harry > > Potter") in which she says she expects Harry to continue throwing > > temper tantrums in the next books. Whilst I don't think Harry will > > give up his angst that easily, I think it would be thematically > > better (and more representative of real-life coping) for Harry to > > act down, depressed and hopeless, not still angry. > >> snip > > I think the determination to fight Voldemort to the death and to > > accept his place in the prophecy should come only after Harry has > > surrendered to it all. I think for Harry to give up his strong > > Gryffindor traits of bravery and courage for a period of time will > > make his final battle with Voldemort much more powerful. He isn't > > brave and courageous because he has some innate inborn quality- he > > > has to *choose* to use it. > > > > > > Alla: > > > > Very interesting post. Even though I don't want Harry to become pre- > > OOP Harry, I am with you here - I don't think we 'll see always > > angry Harry in HBP. > > > > Yes, I think we'll see depressed and grieving Harry, but again > > this "he will have to master his emotions in order to be useful" > > quote > > makes me wonder how long this stage will last. > > SNIP > > > > Like maybe he will decide to give up one thing - Quidditch for > > example and then some kind of disaster strikes and Harry is back to > > the rescue. Too bad though, I would love him to doubt his destiny. > > SNIP > > > > > > Yes, Harry has to choose his courage and I agree - to win over > > Voldemort Harry has to stop being afraid of death (maybe he WILL > > travel to underworld after all). I think not being afraid of death > > will help him survive at the end. > > > > SNIP > > imamommy: > > I would expect the boy to display the classic five steps of grief: > shock, denial, anger/bargaining, depression, and acceptance. These > are the five steps people go through when something else traumatic > happens to them. Each of these steps is essential to mental health > for the individual. > > So, at the end of OoP, we definitely see Harry in shock. We will > probably see him either in the denial or anger/bargaining phase at > the beginning of HBP, and over the course of the sixth and seventh > book, see him progress throughdepression to eventual acceptance. > >SNIP > > Often this kind of depression causes a falling out with old friends, > and hanging around new friends who tend to have a demoralizing effect > on the teenager. I don't see Harry chumming up to Draco & Co., but > is there anyone else he could escape to as a departure from Ron and > Hermione? Theodore Nott, perhaps? > > I think he will withdraw from Hermione especially for a time. She > tends to be his voice of reason and conscience, and I think he will > want to escape that voice for awhile. > > imamommy Linda: I really think that Harry accepted his Gryffindor self in SS. (courage and integrity) He had the option to go the self-absorbed, apathetic route then and shunned the thought of being with people who could potentially turn to the dark side. He turned his back on Draco before he even knew what the houses were and what they stood for. He chose his own path and he will continue to do so. I don't think that it is a stretch to say that he is going to refuse his "destiny" for a while, but he already hates Voldemort and not because he was told to. He hates him because he murdered his parents, he tortures and hurts people. He hates him for what he did to Neville's family. He hates him for killing Cedric. He hates him for breaking up his father's friendships from school. He hates him for Sirius being in Azkaban and forcing him to have to live with the Dursleys. All of which he knew before he ever found out about the prophesy. The prophesy just makes it more important to everyone else. If Harry does decide to take a break from Ron and Hermione, he will turn to another Gryffindor... my money is on Neville. I think that Harry is going to have a new-found sympathy for Neville. Things always seem to go wrong for him too. He would be someone for Harry to commiserate with. Linda - who hopes for a braver Harry, with a little room for him to sulk a while : ) From prongs at marauders-map.net Thu Dec 9 16:04:00 2004 From: prongs at marauders-map.net (Silver Stag) Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 11:04:00 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Who is Mr Prentice? References: <20041208204528.55291.qmail@web53109.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <029701c4de08$b725d0f0$0201a8c0@bettysue> No: HPFGUIDX 119575 Griffin782002: I think Mr Prentice must be one of Mrs Figg's cats. She had statioed one of her cats outside Harry's house in case something could happened. It is logical that she used her cats again just in case. __ Now Me, Betty: I think it's more logical that Mr. Prentice is a human, probably another squib or a muggle. If he'd been a cat she wouldn't have taken enough notice to tell Harry again to keep his wand out. If he's a squib, seeing a wand's no big deal, and if he's a muggle, he'd probably wonder why Harry was carrying a wooden stick, but that question would quickly be drowned by wondering about Dudley. It's also like Mrs. Figg already said, though, it's already hit the fan, so he may as well keep his wand out no matter who sees now, just in case. Betty 'Peace and freedom, do you say? The North would have known them little but for us. Fear would have destroyed them. But when dark things come from the houseless hills, or creep from sunless woods, they fly from us. What roads would any dare to tread, what safety would there be in quiet lands, or in the homes of simple men at night, if the Dunedain were asleep, or were all gone into the grave? 'And yet less thanks have we than you. Travellers scowl at us, and countrymen give us scornful names. "Strider" I am to one fat man who lives within a day's march of foes that would freeze his heart, or lay his little town in ruin, if he were not guarded ceaselessly. Yet we would not have it otherwise. If simple folk are free from care and fear, simple they will be, and we must be secret to keep them so.' ----- Original Message ----- From: "Juli" To: Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2004 3:45 PM Subject: [HPforGrownups] Who is Mr Prentice? > > > Last night I was reading OoP for the hundredth time, > and, well, I noticed something I've never really seen > before, anyway, here it goes: > > 'Keep your wand out,' she told Harry, as they entered > Wisteria Walk. 'Never mind the Statute of Secrecy now, > there's going to be hell to pay anyway, we might as > well be hanged for a dragon as an egg. Talk about the > Reasonable Restriction of Underage Sorcery. this was > exactly what Dumbledore was afraid of - What's that at > the end of the street? Oh, it's just Mr Prentice. > don't put your wand away, boy, don't I keep telling > you I'm no use?' > > (OoP, Ch 2, A Peck of Owls) > > This happens right after Harry and Dudley are attacked > by dementors. My question is Who is Mr Prentice? Is he > a muggle, a Squib, a wizard? My guess is he's either a > squib or a wizard, why else would Mrs Figg allow him > to see Harry with a wand? Thoughts anyone? > > Juli > > > > > > > > > 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 > > > > > > > > > > From prongs at marauders-map.net Thu Dec 9 16:09:04 2004 From: prongs at marauders-map.net (Silver Stag) Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 11:09:04 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Who is Mr Prentice? References: <20041209005529.60860.qmail@web53105.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <02ab01c4de09$6b844900$0201a8c0@bettysue> No: HPFGUIDX 119576 Continuing my previous message I forgot to add that if Mr. Prentice were a wizard, the ministry would have a record, and they don't. This from Ch. 8. "Full name?" said Fudge loudly, when Mrs Figg had perched herself nervously on the very edge of her seat. "Arabella Doreen Figg," said Mrs Figg in her quavery voice. "And who exactly are you?" said Fudge, in a bored and lofty voice. "I'm a resident of Little Whinging, close to where Harry Potter lives," said Mrs Figg. "We have no record of any witch or wizard living in Little Whinging, other than Harry Potter," said Madam Bones at once. "That situation has always been closely monitored, given ... given past events." "I'm a Squib," said Mrs Fig& "So you wouldn't have me registered, would you?" Betty From cat_kind at yahoo.com Thu Dec 9 16:14:28 2004 From: cat_kind at yahoo.com (cat_kind) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 16:14:28 -0000 Subject: Sexuality as a theme in HP (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119577 Olivier wrote: > Some read HP books as mysteries, other like to see them as of the > adventure and fantasy genre, and some as fairy-tales. There are even > readers that see in them deep christian or symbolic meaning. In this > post, I try to explore the way I read them: as the journey from boyhood > to manhood, with an explicit reference to sexuality. Just as a > forewarning, I insist that the following will deal with adult theme. (snip) >PoA, like CoS, is also incredibly concerned with sexuality. (snip) > One is the graveyard scene (which can be seen as a rape) > and the other is the psyche of Barty Crouch Junior. I think an argument > can be made that Barty Junior has such a troubled mind because he never > resolved his oedipal desires for his mother. (snip) > Definitely, Snape was not the right person to teach Harry to control > his sexual desires (half of Harry definitely wants to know what > mysteries Snape is trying to hide). Fatherly advices about sex should > have been Dumbledore's job, as he recognizes later. catkind: I have to admit, my first reaction to this post was to laugh aloud. You can Freudian-analyse anything, and a world full of wands and broomsticks is asking for trouble. But to some extent I feel you're not even doing Freudian analysis so much as playing the teenaged-boy-game of going "snigger, snigger, nudge,nudge" whenever anyone says anything. For example, substituting rape for every other kind of violence, and substituting sexual desire for every other emotion (Harry is supposed to learn to control his *anger*, as McG explicitly states elsewhere) as in the above quote, is just not playing fair IMHO. Another example where I feel you're pulling rabbit stew out of hats: Barty Crouch's mother loved him, I don't recall anything in the book to suggest he cared two pins for her, or why would he have left her to die in Azkaban? The idea of Lupin representing paedophilia is interesting: I'd say he rather represents something like being HIV positive - he isn't in fact dangerous to the children, with proper precautions, and certainly shouldn't be prevented from teaching, but there is a lot of prejudice against him and people are irrationally scared of him. I would strongly debate your claims that the books make "explicit reference to sexuality" - perhaps explicit wasn't the word you were looking for? Whatever messages you are reading into it, they're very much implicit. I would also strongly debate that, for another random quote, "PoA, like CoS, is also incredibly concerned with sexuality." You have written in the sexual symbolism yourself, it seems unlikely that it was the author's intent. It is unfair to substitute everywhere the word sex for the word magic and then to claim that the books are all about sex. Okay, so this is an exaggeration of what you are doing, but I hope you take my point. I would be very reluctant to ascribe some of your symbolisms even to Rowling's subconscious. It is indeed interesting to see what themes you find when you make some of the more obvious Freudian substitutions. However, some of the messages that come out if we try to do this consistently are pretty disturbing. For example, if snakes represent sexuality, then what do you make of the overbearing message that snakes are bad - Slytherin house, the Basilisk, Voldemort himself looking like a snake? If the patronus symbolises what you suggest, what is the meaning of it being such a powerful weapon? I agree that the books are very much about growing up, but that is true whether one substitutes sex for every other feature of adulthood or not. catkind, hoping it is not being offensive. From foxmoth at qnet.com Thu Dec 9 16:37:52 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 16:37:52 -0000 Subject: Sexuality as a theme in HP (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119578 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, olivier.fouquet+harry at m... wrote: > > Some read HP books as mysteries, other like to see them as of the adventure and fantasy genre, and some as fairy-tales. There are even readers that see in them deep christian or symbolic meaning. In this post, I try to explore the way I read them: as the journey from boyhood to manhood, with an explicit reference to sexuality. Just as a forewarning, I insist that the following will deal with adult theme. > > Other posts on this subjects include #47966, #83372, #101297 and #101335. > > > snip> > > Interesting indeed.... > > I won't dispute with the symbology nor the logic. The choice and use of each is the prerogative of the one presenting the argument. > But.... > This is (one of) your interpretations of HP. > Do you think that this symbology is part of the authors intention from the outset or could it be an unconscious, accidental or unintentional theme on her part? Or even an inevitability given that it follows a boy through adolescence to adulthood? > Pippin: I think the sexual symbolism is itself a metaphor for power. After all, Hermione and Cho can do the patronus charm, but their femininity is not in question. I would say Snape and Lupin both symbolize repression with Lupin being the more dangerous because he pretends his desires are innocent--he represses his guilt instead. He speaks of the Marauder outings as the happiest times of his life, though he admits he should have felt guilty about them. Though Snape's occlumency lessons did not solve the ostensible problem of the dreams, they did solve the psychological problem which was posed at the beginning of the book--Harry's experience with Voldemort had left him with a taste for sadism, as shown by his attack on Dudley. By the end of the book this desire has been successfully repressed, and Harry is unable to perform the cruciatus curse. Pippin From quigonginger at yahoo.com Thu Dec 9 17:11:36 2004 From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 17:11:36 -0000 Subject: Petunia (was Re: Petunia, New Headquarters, and Ron and Hermione (LONG)) In-Reply-To: <20041209003536.23298.qmail@web53109.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119579 Hima (welcome, BTW) wrote: (big snip)Is it just me, or does it seem like > she is really, truly frightened when she hears that > Voldy is back? > Juli: Of course she's afraid, LV is the person who > killed her sister, she may not agree with her > lifestyle and everything but Lily was still her sister > and I bet she loved her. We don't really know but LV > may have also killed her parents, so why wouldn't she > be afraid that the person or *thinh* that killed her > entire family was back. Hima again: > >> Like she may have had a previous encounter with > him? I've been thinking and maybe Petunia DID have a > previous encounter with LV. Maybe when he was looking > for the Potters and since the (rat) Charm was already > in place, he couldn't find them yet? What if he went > to the Evans' house, and demanded Petunia, and her > parents to tell him where they were? But maybe > Dumbledore didn't tell the Evans' where they were > going to be, because of this? And since Voldy may not > have believed them, he killed Petunia's parents in > front of her. Then turned on Petunia, and said the > same thing, only she somehow *got out* of being AKed > by Voldemort. > > Juli: Your theory just has a slight problem: The only > person to ever survive an AK is Harry (Crouch!Moody in > GoF Ch 14, The Unforgivable Curses: "Not nice," he > said calmly. "Not pleasant. And there's no > countercurse. There's no > blocking it. Only one known person has ever survived > it, and he's sitting right in > front of me." refering to Harry), so if Petunia was > sometime AK'd by LV, she wouldn't be here. Ginger: I snipped the rest to keep from having to relabel it "very very long". Hima and Juli, I think we may have something here. We have often wondered what happened to Lily and Petunia's parents and why Petunia took Harry in. Perhaps this would explain it: LV goes to the Evans home after the Potters are in GH, threatens them to get the hiding place and finds that they have no answer, as Hima suggested. Perhaps LV killed the parents to show Petunia his power, and then (instead of trying to AK her) tells her that if she doesn't give him the answers he wants that the same fate awaits her and/or Vernon and Dudley. She would have been far willing to take in Harry to be pretected from LV, if this was part of the deal. The only obvious flaw in this is that Petunia doesn't seem to be greiving in the beginning of PS/SS. Maybe it would work with a different timeline. Anyone? Ginger, who hates being sick and is going back to bed From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 9 17:35:20 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 17:35:20 -0000 Subject: Otters and weasels (Was: Hermione's Patonus) In-Reply-To: <20041208193825.DYDN8465.mta10.adelphia.net@steveupstairs> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119580 Steve wrote: > Well that clears up why Hermione's patronus is an otter. But what about the references to other otter related animals around the Burrow? Carol (belatedly going upthread) responds: I don't know how they relate to Hermione's patronus, but it's interesting that the Weasley (Weasel-ly) family would live near Otter-y St. Catchpole. There must be some sort of connection. Possibly JKR wants to partially vindicate weasels, which she sees as having an undeserved bad reputation? I know that sounds silly, but why give them the name Weasley and point out the connection so we don't miss it (as in Draco's reference to "Potty and the Weasel") if it doesn't have some significance? (Odd, too, that Draco is turned into a white ferret, rather like an ermine--white having reference to his pale blond hair, I suppose, rather than to White or Light magic; JKR clearly avoids associating whiteness with goodness.) Or maybe there's traditional symbolism attached to those animals, as there is with the badger (the patron animal of Hufflepuff). Carol, who finally realized, thanks to this thread, why the Weasels', erm, Weasleys', house is called the Burrow From cat_kind at yahoo.com Thu Dec 9 17:47:29 2004 From: cat_kind at yahoo.com (cat_kind) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 17:47:29 -0000 Subject: Sexuality as a theme in HP (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119581 Pippin: Though Snape's occlumency lessons did not solve the > ostensible problem of the dreams, they did solve the > psychological problem which was posed at the beginning of the > book--Harry's experience with Voldemort had left him with a taste > for sadism, as shown by his attack on Dudley. By the end of the > book this desire has been successfully repressed, and Harry is > unable to perform the cruciatus curse. catkind: Harry's experience with Voldemort made him sadistic? Surely he has seen plenty of this bullying, taunting behaviour from Dudley himself, and assorted Slytherins, he doesn't need Voldemort to teach it to him. I think it is more that, partly due to his experience with Voldemort, Harry is no longer scared of smaller bullies. (And isn't sadistic a bit strong? I'd say he was angry.) What is more, I wouldn't say he's recovered from the tendency by the end of the book. He taunts Draco Malfoy about his father, and goes as far as physical nastiness on the train, in scenes which remind me strongly of the Harry/Dudley one - in both cases the victim thorougly deserves it, but it makes me uncomfortable that Harry lowers himself to their level. Do you really think Harry could have performed a cruciatus at the beginning of OotP? catkind From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 9 18:06:05 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 18:06:05 -0000 Subject: Sirius & Remus post-Hogwarts (was: Snape and McGonagall) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119582 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Renee" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "naamagatus" > wrote: > > > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Renee" wrote: > > > > > > > > Of course, if we hear that James and Lily also suspected Remus, > > >this second interpretation becomes invalid. > > > > > > > Isn't it practically canon that they suspected Lupin? By the very > > fact that they accepted Peter as SK we can tell that, by default, > > Lupin was the only one left for them to suspect. And they had to > > suspect, since DD *told* them that someone close to them was a spy > > for Voldemort. > > > > Naama > > Renee: > Yes, but I was wondering if they suspected them independently of > Sirius, or just because Sirius argued he was suspect, and why. Carol responds: I still think that the absence of both Remus and Peter from Harry's baptism, evidently a secret and hurried affair, indicates not only that James was closer to Sirius than to either of the others, but that he was the only person besides Lily that James *really* trusted. In the end, to his misfortune, he distrusts even Dumbledore. And Sirius has never really treated Remus as an equal, disdainfully informing him in the Pensieve scene that *he* (Sirius) doesn't need to study for the Transfiguration OWL, and of course disregarding the consequences to Remus if his "Prank" had been successful. The dialogue after the DADA OWL suggests that his importance to their group was always that he was a werewolf, the impetus for their learning to become animagi and the reason for their monthly midnight adventures. "Wish it was a full moon," says Sirius in the Pensieve scene (quoted from memory), disregarding Remus's feelings. And James, too, jokes about the werewolf question on the DADA exam. Remus reacts mildly, laughing at his own very unfunny malady (though he does ask them to lower their voices so they won't be overheard). It appears that he's always been primarily a werewolf in their eyes. But once they leave Hogwarts, the significance of being a werewolf changes. Instead of being a mere transformation into an animal, very much like their own animagus forms but possible only once a month and involuntary, a transformation that makes it possible for James, Sirius, and Peter to have exciting adventures (at the risk of exposure for themselves and danger to the townspeople), it becomes a condition that Lupin suffers from that makes it difficult or impossible to find work. Their relationship inevitably changes. Even Sirius, who has been living with James, is distanced from him a bit because of his marriage, but he (jealously?) maintains his tie with James to an extent that the others don't. He is the best man; he is the baby's godfather. Remus and Peter aren't even invited to the baptism. I still see estrangement between Remus and the others as early as fifteen months before Godric's Hollow and possibly before. Estrangement leads to suspicion. And once it becomes known that there's a traitor in the Order and the Order members are being "picked off one by one" by the Death Eaters, who better to suspect than an unhappy and disenfranchised werewolf? And once it becomes clear that the traitor is someone close to James, someone who isn't his beloved Sirius, the identity becomes certain--at least in Sirius's eyes. And either he has enough influence, and apparently enough evidence, to convince both James and Lily, or they already suspect Remus themselves. Otherwise they would never have made Peter the Secret Keeper, no matter how loyal and innocent he seemed, and particularly since his perceived incompetence was hardly a desirable trait in a Secret Keeper, Sirius's reasoning to the contrary. Carol, who really ought to be editing but doesn't want to get behind on posting again From ohneill_2001 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 9 18:13:41 2004 From: ohneill_2001 at yahoo.com (ohneill_2001) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 18:13:41 -0000 Subject: Fear of Lupin irrational? (Was: Sexuality as a theme...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119583 cat_kind wrote: > The idea of Lupin representing paedophilia is interesting: I'd say he > rather represents something like being HIV positive - he isn't in fact > dangerous to the children, with proper precautions, and certainly > shouldn't be prevented from teaching, but there is a lot of prejudice > against him and people are irrationally scared of him. Now Cory: I know where you're trying to go with this, but I'm not sure it's a great analogy. We're talking about a person who *will* attack and kill people if he forgets to take his potion once per month (and who did, in fact, forget to take it on one occasion in POA). I agree that Lupin is supposed to represent the unfairly-discriminated- against minority, but do you really think others' fear of werewolves is so irrational? --Cory From caseylane at wideopenwest.com Thu Dec 9 18:28:37 2004 From: caseylane at wideopenwest.com (Casey) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 18:28:37 -0000 Subject: Fear of Lupin irrational? (Was: Sexuality as a theme...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119584 > I know where you're trying to go with this, but I'm not sure it's a > great analogy. We're talking about a person who *will* attack and > kill people if he forgets to take his potion once per month (and who > did, in fact, forget to take it on one occasion in POA). I agree > that Lupin is supposed to represent the unfairly-discriminated- > against minority, but do you really think others' fear of werewolves > is so irrational? > > --Cory Actually I think HIV is a great example. It's a disease that, with proper precautions, will not put other's into danger. With reckless behavior though, others can and will be exposed to the same illness. Casey From Koinonia2 at hotmail.com Thu Dec 9 18:49:11 2004 From: Koinonia2 at hotmail.com (koinonia02) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 18:49:11 -0000 Subject: Sexuality as a theme in HP (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119585 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, olivier.fouquet+harry at m...Message 119563, wrote: > Some read HP books as mysteries, other like to see them as of the > adventure and fantasy genre, and some as fairy-tales. There are >even readers that see in them deep christian or symbolic meaning. >In this post, I try to explore the way I read them: as the journey >from boyhood to manhood, with an explicit reference to sexuality. "K": Let me state I read these books for the mysteries, fantasy and adventure. I guess all the explicit sexual references are passing way over my head. I just don't see it. My comments are not said in a mocking or rude way. I just want to state I disagree with your take on the books. Oliver: > Significantly, as early as CoS we discover that Filch is himself >not a wizard, i.e he is himself deprived of manhood and sexuality. "K": Where in the books does it say Filch is deprived of his manhood and sexuality? Is it because he isn't a wizard? What does that say for Muggles? Oliver: >Hermione breaks into Snape's office, steals some ingredients > from him to prepare a potion that will change her in to someone >else. Alas, things don't go as well as planned and Hermione ends up >locking herself in a deserted toilet, desperately not wanting her >boy friends to see her, and with a lot of hairs. If one accepts >that Snape psychological role is to embody the disturbing aspects >of sexuality, this whole story is (in my opinion) a very nice and >tactful description of a girl first menstruation. "K": So what does this say about Agnes? She's covered with fur in St. Mungo's. I'm a bit concerned about that. ;-) Oliver: > Lupin's role is also clear. He is a remainder that sexual forces >are too powerful to be tamed, they must be accepted and may be >omesticated (the stag bows to Harry) but they also are a tremendous >threat. Isabelle Smadja, a french author, has theorized that Lupin >could also represent, well, pedophile tendencies. She interprets in >that sense the infamous event where "Lupin made a sudden motion >with his arm as though to grip Harry's shoulder, but thought better >of it." As she sees it, Lupin knows all too well that his sexuality >is not entirely safe, so he tries to contain his impulse as best as he can. "K": Does anyone believe that? Does anyone really believe JKR has given Remus Lupin pedophile tendencies and yet portrays him as being discriminated against? I find that thought very disturbing. Oliver: > (the image of Snape being > mocked by a girl for his failure to "mount" a "broomstick" carries >some very uneasy remembrances for many teenage boy) and sexual >humiliation of the worst kind inflicted by the two most popular >boys of the school. "K": This never, ever entered my mind. Oliver: > Definitely, Snape was not the right person to teach Harry to >control his sexual desires (half of Harry definitely wants to know >what mysteries Snape is trying to hide). Fatherly advices about sex >should have been Dumbledore's job, as he recognizes later. "K": Please give me verses that show where Snape was trying to teach Harry to control his sexual desires. What happened to the Harry/Voldemort mind intrusion? Oliver: >Snape is not only a teacher, he is a > symbol of something deeply rooted in a sane mind: some kind of > uneasiness towards sexuality. Most of what he does and says can be > related to this. I suspect that most of the debate between Snape haters > and Snape worshippers (or even shippers) reflects more the inner > posture of the reader towards this uneasiness than anything in canon. "K": As a Snape fan I must say my "inner posture" sees nothing of the sort in canon. Snape and uneasiness towards sexuality? How in the world have I missed this? See, I believe more than anything these kind of remarks just show where the mind of the reader is. If a person is determined/wants to find sexual references throughout this book or any other they will do so. I see none in the examples you have given. I guess we just read the books differently. Oliver: > JKR herself warned her girl readers not to fall for it. "K": Exactly what did JKR warn the readers not to fall for? A man with sexual problems? I'm not sure what you mean. Here's the latest interview with Rowling and her comments concerning Snape. ~*J K Rowling at the Edinburgh Book Festival Aug. 15 2004*~ QUESTION: Who is your favourite character in the books? JKR: I have loads of favourite characters. I really like Harry, Ron, Hermione, Hagrid and Dumbledore. I love writing Snape?***even though he is not always the nicest person***, he is really fun to write. I love writing Dudley. If I could meet anyone, I might choose Lupin. I really like him. My favourite new character is Luna?I am very fond of her. QUESTION: 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]. JKR: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. QUESTION: 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!" (*my emphasis*) In short form: ~I love writing Snape?***even though he is not always the nicest person*** ~Girls, stop going for the bad guy. Go for a nice man in the first place. (Draco? Snape?) ~But you must not forget that Snape was a Death Eater. He will have seen things that... ~...it's bad boy syndrome, isn't it? It's very depressing." The comments of JKR have to do with nice/bad. I don't believe these comments are sexual in any way. Perhaps it is another interview that you have in mind and I would be curious to know which one it is. I guess we can each continue to read the books as we so desire. What you consider to be canon for sexual references I see in another way. What I consider to be canon for just a plain old good werewolf- wizard-vampire-giant-veela-humorous-fantasy story, you see otherwise. So what happened to the story about good, evil and choice? "K" (To the HPfGU member who asked the Snape questions - great job!) From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 9 18:57:13 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 18:57:13 -0000 Subject: Sirius & Remus post-Hogwarts (was: Snape and McGonagall) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119586 > Carol responds: And Sirius has never really treated Remus as an equal, disdainfully informing him in the Pensieve scene that *he* (Sirius) doesn't need to study for the Transfiguration OWL, and of course disregarding the consequences to Remus if his "Prank" had been successful. Alla: I disagree with the assumption that Sirius informing Remus that he did not need to study equals him never treating Remus as an equal. I see it as normal bragging of one friend to another. And I won't start ranting about how much we don't know about the Prank yet again, I won't ... :o) Carol: Even Sirius, who has been living with James, is distanced from him a bit because of his marriage, but he (jealously?) maintains his tie with James to an extent that the others don't. He is the best man; he is the baby's godfather. Remus and Peter aren't even invited to the baptism. Alla: We don't know the reasons of Remus and Peter absence. It could be that they were invited, but were unable to attend (Order business, for example) Carol: I still see estrangement between Remus and the others as early as fifteen months before Godric's Hollow and possibly before. Estrangement leads to suspicion. And once it becomes known that there's a traitor in the Order and the Order members are being "picked off one by one" by the Death Eaters, who better to suspect than an unhappy and disenfranchised werewolf? And once it becomes clear that the traitor is someone close to James, someone who isn't his beloved Sirius, the identity becomes certain--at least in Sirius's eyes. And either he has enough influence, and apparently enough evidence, to convince both James and Lily, or they already suspect Remus themselves. Otherwise they would never have made Peter the Secret Keeper, no matter how loyal and innocent he seemed, and particularly since his perceived incompetence was hardly a desirable trait in a Secret Keeper, Sirius's reasoning to the contrary. Alla: Hmmm, I agree that estrangement must have started earlier and for some specific reason. I very strongly doubt that said reason was the fact that Remus was a werewolf. Again, no matter how their relationship changed, I don't think that James and Sirius suddenly become prejudiced against werewolves. I still think that Sirius' reasoning was not idiotic when he offered Peter as secret keeper , because Lily, who would not just agree to anything Marauders offered, but clearly thought on her own quite well, went along with the plan. (I hope Nora forgives me from rehashing her idea again - I cannot help it. I share her reasoning on too many issues and she writes MUCH better than me. :o)) From ohneill_2001 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 9 19:04:00 2004 From: ohneill_2001 at yahoo.com (ohneill_2001) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 19:04:00 -0000 Subject: Fear of Lupin irrational? (Was: Sexuality as a theme...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119587 caseylane wrote: > Actually I think HIV is a great example. It's a disease that, with > proper precautions, will not put other's into danger. With reckless > behavior though, others can and will be exposed to the same illness. Now Cory: Yeah, I understand the analogy. I can't put my finger on why, but somehow I just don't see the two as the same. I would not have a problem with having my child taught by a person with HIV (and to those who would, I would have no problem calling their fears "irrational"), but I would be apprehensive about letting my child be taught by a werewolf. Perhaps a better comparison is a person with a treatable mental disorder that, if untreated, causes violent psychotic outbursts. I can certainly sympathize with such a person, but that doesn't mean I'm going to be 100% comfortable letting my child by taught by someone who might kill them the first time he forgets to take his meds. --Cory From steve51445 at adelphia.net Thu Dec 9 19:07:46 2004 From: steve51445 at adelphia.net (Steve) Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 14:07:46 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Otters and weasels (Was: Hermione's Patonus) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041209190734.TII26786.mta10.adelphia.net@steveupstairs> No: HPFGUIDX 119588 -----Original Message----- From: justcarol67 [mailto:justcarol67 at yahoo.com] Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 12:35 PM To: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Subject: [HPforGrownups] Otters and weasels (Was: Hermione's Patonus) >Carol responds: > (Odd, too, that Draco is turned into a white >ferret, rather like an ermine--white having reference to his pale >blond hair, I suppose, rather than to White or Light magic; JKR >clearly avoids associating whiteness with goodness.) Steve: I didn't even remember about the Draco/ferret thing until I read it here, even though the reference I found did mention ferrets as related to all those other animals. I wonder if there's a more direct connection between the Malfoy and Weasley families than through the Black line. I did do a bit more searching online, and I found a Burrow Hill Farm a couple of Km's to the SE of Ottery St. Mary. 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 From Vivamus at TaprootTech.com Thu Dec 9 19:23:21 2004 From: Vivamus at TaprootTech.com (Vivamus) Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 14:23:21 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Sexuality as a theme in HP (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200412091423893.SM01064@devbox> No: HPFGUIDX 119589 > Olivier wrote: > In this > > post, I try to explore the way I read them: as the journey from > > boyhood to manhood, with an explicit reference to > sexuality. Just as a > > forewarning, I insist that the following will deal with adult theme. > catkind: I have to admit, my first reaction to this post was > to laugh aloud. You can Freudian-analyse anything, and a > world full of wands and broomsticks is asking for trouble. Vivamus: Excellent post, catkind, and very well-said. Is it even possible to write a story without saying many things that can be interpreted sexually? These are childrens books, after all. There is much illumination about the growing up process, but it seems to me that sexuality has largely been washed out of what is otherwise a highly sexually-charged time of life. Rather than emphasize sexuality, I would say that JKR has DE-emphasized it. To badly paraphrase Freud, "Sometimes a story is just a story." I find Freudian analysis an interesting way of looking at life, that occasionally renders useful insights, but does not work well as a model for understanding either behavior or literature. Granted, the HP books are a superb collection of stories, revealing a vast sub-text of values, questions, emotions, and even some answers. From an in-depth reading of them, one can learn a lot about growing up, and even some pretty good glimpses into the soul of the author. (Writing is a very naked act, isn't it?) I don't know that the series teaches anything at all about sexuality, other than in the most vague of terms. Vivamus, who does applaud those who struggle to find meaning in dark corners, but resists the idea that he must see things that are not there From cat_kind at yahoo.com Thu Dec 9 20:11:00 2004 From: cat_kind at yahoo.com (cat_kind) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 20:11:00 -0000 Subject: Fear of Lupin irrational? (Was: Sexuality as a theme...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119590 > Cory: > > Perhaps a better comparison is a person with a treatable mental > disorder that, if untreated, causes violent psychotic outbursts. I > can certainly sympathize with such a person, but that doesn't mean > I'm going to be 100% comfortable letting my child by taught by > someone who might kill them the first time he forgets to take his > meds. catkind: Good point, Cory. I'm going with your analogy, though I presume JKR intended more the HIV one. The difference being that the preventative measures for HIV are more passive - not doing certain things - whereas Lupin has to take actual active precautions. But if that is the scenario, doesn't it make Dumbledore guilty of gross negligence? At the very least there should have been a double-check on Lupin taking the potion. Mind you, Dumbledore is pretty reckless in general. catkind From norek_archives2 at hotmail.com Thu Dec 9 20:17:27 2004 From: norek_archives2 at hotmail.com (Janet Anderson) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 20:17:27 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Petunia and Voldemort (was Various) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119591 Ginger said: >Hima and Juli, I think we may have something here. We have often >wondered what happened to Lily and Petunia's parents and why Petunia >took Harry in. > >Perhaps this would explain it: LV goes to the Evans home after the >Potters are in GH, threatens them to get the hiding place and finds >that they have no answer, as Hima suggested. > >Perhaps LV killed the parents to show Petunia his power, and then >(instead of trying to AK her) tells her that if she doesn't give him >the answers he wants that the same fate awaits her and/or Vernon and >Dudley. She would have been far willing to take in Harry to be >pretected from LV, if this was part of the deal. > >The only obvious flaw in this is that Petunia doesn't seem to be >greiving in the beginning of PS/SS. Maybe it would work with a >different timeline. Anyone? Another possible flaw is that if Voldemort wanted answers from either Petunia or her parents, he would get more use out of an Imperio than out of an AK. He'd then know for sure that they did not know where the Potters were. Not that he might not kill the parents on general principles (or to try to flush the Potters out of hiding) ... Janet Anderson From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu Dec 9 20:55:31 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 20:55:31 -0000 Subject: Sexuality as a theme in HP (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119592 Olivier wrote: > I try to explore the way I read them: as the journey from boyhood > to manhood, with an explicit reference to sexuality. SSSusan: It's an interesting take, though I tend to hold some of the same overall objections that catkind expresses in #119577. I also am curious about what your response would be to Kneasy's question in #119572 about author intent. Olivier: > PoA, like CoS, is also incredibly concerned with sexuality. > Harry's story in this book is his search for a sound and healthy > vision of his future sexuality. > The Patronus charm itself is a pretty vivid metaphor for, well, > you know. > But most important than the scenes themselves are the characters > in PoA. ...James thematic role we have already spoken about, he is > the embodiment of an accepted sexuality, both powerful, protective > and responsible. ...Sirius represents the rawest sexual impulses. > He is (according to JKR) the "sexiest, most dangerous marauder" > who had escaped from a prison no-one had ever left before and that > no- one (even Dumbledore) seems to be able to catch or stop. SSSusan: What I am most surprised about, in your review of PoA, is that you don't address Peter Pettigrew. Surely you can make something quite **significant** out of that name, as it points towards the issue of sexuality?? ;-) Olivier: > Lupin's role is also clear. He is a remainder that sexual forces > are too powerful to be tamed, they must be accepted and may be > domesticated (the stag bows to Harry) but they also are a > tremendous threat. Isabelle Smadja, a french author, has theorized > that Lupin could also represent, well, pedophile tendencies. She > interprets in that sense the infamous event where "Lupin made a > sudden motion with his arm as though to grip Harry's shoulder, but > thought better of it." As she sees it, Lupin knows all too well > that his sexuality is not entirely safe, so he tries to contain > his impulse as best as he can. Catkind: > The idea of Lupin representing paedophilia is interesting: I'd say > he rather represents something like being HIV positive - he isn't > in fact dangerous to the children, with proper precautions, and > certainly shouldn't be prevented from teaching, but there is a lot > of prejudice against him and people are irrationally scared of him. SSSusan: I object to Ms. Smadja's interpretation of Lupin. That is reading so *very* much into that motion, imo. I just read this scene last night, and I do not understand why it's so hard to take that motion as simply Lupin's impulse to comfort Harry but then realizing that he "knows" Harry better than Harry knows him. If that makes sense? Lupin knew James & Lily so well; like Sirius will later, he probably sometimes feels as if he knows Harry well, too. But Harry doesn't know about the James/Sirius/Lupin connection -- at least not the details -- and I think Lupin stopped himself from completing an action that he thought might seem weird or inappropriate to Harry. Regardless, I do NOT think it symbolizes any pedophilic tendency on Lupin's part. [ESE!Lupin is fun to consider; but would JKR intentionally introduce a character who not only appears to be one of the good guys, one of Harry's biggest supporters, but who's actually a pedophile? I just don't think so.] Anyway, I think catkind's interpretation makes more sense. Siriusly Snapey Susan From olivier.fouquet+harry at m4x.org Thu Dec 9 20:58:59 2004 From: olivier.fouquet+harry at m4x.org (olivier.fouquet+harry at m4x.org) Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 21:58:59 +0100 Subject: Sexuality as a theme Message-ID: <25BBE8BA-4A25-11D9-9D44-000A95665DE8@m4x.org> No: HPFGUIDX 119593 > Interesting indeed.... > > I won't dispute with the symbology nor the logic. The choice and use of > each is the prerogative of the one presenting the argument. > But.... > This is (one of) your interpretations of HP. > Do you think that this symbology is part of the authors intention from > the outset or could it be an unconscious, accidental or unintentional > theme on her part? Or even an inevitability given that it follows a boy > through adolescence to adulthood? > > Kneasy I think it is very much conscious and intentional, particularly in CoS and PoA. However, to say that I don't have a proof of this is an understatement. I can only rely on the many instances one can find (but of course many will correctly dispute this as circular reasonning). JKR is said to have enjoyed Cuaron's adaptation of PoA and the movie plays even more directly with sexual theme. Generally speaking, I think author are much more conscious of what they write than they are sometimes credited. At least that's the impression I gathered from the few discussions I had with the authors I have had the chance to meet. I was particularly impressed by a talk given by a friend of Camus (and a specialist of Camus work). He showed us one instance in a (no too well-known) book from Camus and explained us what Camus had meant (of which he had direct knowledge, being his friend). It was extremely elaborate. Is JKR that kind of writer? Well, she certainly has some talent to craft surprises and twists, as well as a certain sense of humor. I don't think it behind her to write purposefully on a symbolic level. I also think it was inevitable in a sense, considering the theme treated. Olivier From luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca Thu Dec 9 21:12:10 2004 From: luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca (Bee Chase) Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 16:12:10 -0500 (EST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Petunia and Voldemort (was Various) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041209211210.74027.qmail@web52008.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119594 Janet Anderson wrote: Ginger said: >Hima and Juli, I think we may have something here. We have often >wondered what happened to Lily and Petunia's parents and why Petunia >took Harry in. > >Perhaps this would explain it: LV goes to the Evans home after the >Potters are in GH, threatens them to get the hiding place and finds >that they have no answer, as Hima suggested. > >Perhaps LV killed the parents to show Petunia his power, and then >(instead of trying to AK her) tells her that if she doesn't give him >the answers he wants that the same fate awaits her and/or Vernon and >Dudley. She would have been far willing to take in Harry to be >pretected from LV, if this was part of the deal. > >The only obvious flaw in this is that Petunia doesn't seem to be >greiving in the beginning of PS/SS. Maybe it would work with a >different timeline. Anyone? Another possible flaw is that if Voldemort wanted answers from either Petunia or her parents, he would get more use out of an Imperio than out of an AK. He'd then know for sure that they did not know where the Potters were. Not that he might not kill the parents on general principles (or to try to flush the Potters out of hiding) ... Janet Anderson Luckdragon's theory: I've always figured that the reason Petunia keeps Harry is that the same magic that protects him while he makes his home with them also protects the Dursley's. Should Harry leave for good Voldemort will be able to find and cross the Dursley threshold. Whether it has anything to do with a vendetta against the Evans family I'm not sure, however; I think one way he might like to get back at Harry is to completely make him an orphan with no relatives to fall back on just as Voldemort had had no relatives. He probably has no idea what Harry has had to deal with in living with the Dursley's. I have a theory that the reason Voldemort attacked the Potter's was because they were in possession of the Sorcerers stone to prevent Voldemort from getting it, and possibly to protect Harry after the prophecy led them to go into hiding. When the curse backfired he was unable to get the stone and Dunbledore had it placed in the Gringott's vault until Harry's return at which time they thought it would be safer at Hogwarts. If the stone had been in Harry's crib it could have taken a part in preventing the AK curse from hurting him and may even have played a part in why Voldemort did not die when the curse backfired. 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 Sponsor Get unlimited calls to U.S./Canada --------------------------------- 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 willsonkmom at msn.com Thu Dec 9 21:20:56 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 21:20:56 -0000 Subject: Potions and checks (was Re: Fear of Lupin irrational? )(Was: Sexuality In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119595 > catkind: > But if that is the scenario, doesn't it make Dumbledore guilty of > gross negligence? At the very least there should have been a > double-check on Lupin taking the potion. > > Mind you, Dumbledore is pretty reckless in general. Potioncat: The double check may have been that Snape would both brew the potion and see that Lupin got it. Of course, on that one evening he takes it to Lupin, sees the map and forgets it just like Lupin did. From R.Vink2 at chello.nl Thu Dec 9 21:33:17 2004 From: R.Vink2 at chello.nl (Renee) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 21:33:17 -0000 Subject: Sexuality as a theme in HP (long) In-Reply-To: <200412091423893.SM01064@devbox> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119596 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Vivamus" wrote: > > Olivier wrote: > > In this > > > post, I try to explore the way I read them: as the journey from > > > boyhood to manhood, with an explicit reference to > > sexuality. Just as a > > > forewarning, I insist that the following will deal with adult theme. > >Vivamus: These > are childrens books, after all. There is much illumination about the > growing up process, but it seems to me that sexuality has largely been > washed out of what is otherwise a highly sexually-charged time of life. > Rather than emphasize sexuality, I would say that JKR has DE- emphasized it. Renee: If the references to sexuality would be as explicit as Olivier claims, the childrens book argument seems valid to me, but not if they're symbolical. Children who aren't ready to deal with such things won't get the symbolism. Children who do get it - well, I'm inclined to think they are ready. JKR may have de-emphasised sexuality on a literal level, but that doesn't mean it's not contained in the subtext. I'd say that Olivier's interpretation is certainly possible when looking beyond the surface of the text. But I have to agree about the sparsity of explicit sexual references (so far). Renee From foxmoth at qnet.com Thu Dec 9 21:41:04 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 21:41:04 -0000 Subject: Potions and checks (was Re: Fear of Lupin irrational? )(Was: Sexuality In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119597 > > catkind: > > But if that is the scenario, doesn't it make Dumbledore guilty of gross negligence? At the very least there should have been a double-check on Lupin taking the potion. > > > > Mind you, Dumbledore is pretty reckless in general. > > Potioncat: > The double check may have been that Snape would both brew the potion and see that Lupin got it. Of course, on that one evening he takes it to Lupin, sees the map and forgets it just like Lupin did.< Pippin: Or Snape knew that the goblet of potion, which he advised Lupin to drink "directly" earlier in the story, would have broken down or evaporated by the time he caught up with Lupin. It smokes, so apparently it's not very stable. He does inform Lupin that he's forgotten to take it. Lupin's failure to react to this information is very strange, and would certainly account for Snape's refusal to take him or Sirius seriously about the rat. It seems there are a great many Hogwarts parents who would agree that a werewolf is too dangerous, even with the potion, to be around their children. But since we don't have accident statistics from the wizarding world, we can't really tell whether their fear is irrational in the sense that they have no problem allowing their children to face other potentially lethal but more familiar perils. Pippin From gbannister10 at aol.com Thu Dec 9 22:33:21 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 22:33:21 -0000 Subject: Who is Mr Prentice? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119598 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "fkilc" wrote: > > Juli wrote: > > > ..... > > Oh, it's just Mr Prentice > > don't put your wand away, boy, don't I keep telling > > you I'm no use?' (OoP, Ch 2, A Peck of Owls) > > > > This happens right after Harry and Dudley are attacked > > by dementors. My question is Who is Mr Prentice? Is he > > a muggle, a Squib, a wizard? My guess is he's either a > > squib or a wizard, why else would Mrs Figg allow him > > to see Harry with a wand? Thoughts anyone? > -Francois: > I always thought that he's nothing more than just a "random muggle"... ;-) Geoff: He's actually a second cousin to Mark Evans.... :-)) From errx2 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 9 16:28:14 2004 From: errx2 at yahoo.com (errx2) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 16:28:14 -0000 Subject: New Here - 1st Post: The mirror Sirius gave Harry in Book 5 Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119599 This may be a stupid question but. . . it has been bugging me since I finished the book months ago. At the end of the Book, Harry finds the mirror Sirius gave him and tries to call Sirius. Could he have used the mirror all along to reach Sirius instead of the fire, etc.? If not, why not? If so, why didn't Sirius just remind him to use the mirror? If anyone is kind enough to answer, please be gentle with me. I read all the books one right after the other and have not reread any, yet. I guess I'm a late bloomer, and I'm glad of it too. I would have gone nuts waiting years for the next book. errx2 From barbfulton at yahoo.com Thu Dec 9 17:02:26 2004 From: barbfulton at yahoo.com (Barb Fulton) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 17:02:26 -0000 Subject: Ron and Luna living close by (was Re: Hermione's Patonus) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119600 > > Steve wrote: > > Who is now wondering why Ron didn't know who Luna was before > > when she lives so close by. > ~<(Laurasia)>~: > The Weasleys are most definitely aware the Lovegoods exist, > they would take the same portkey any time there was a big wizarding > event (like meeting at the bus stop, but never going to the same > destination), but when you can take that zippy portkey, presumably, > halfway across the globe in only a matter of seconds, your local > community becomes less important. Barb now: It doesn't surprise me at all that they didn't know each other. Ron doesn't know people who have been in classes with him (Nott), and it seems to me that the Burrow is fairly isolated. Also, as Sen said, they have a lot of kids, so they don't need to go out of the family to find playmates. The Lovegoods live in the area, but so do the Diggorys, and the Weasley kids only seem to know Cedric from Quidditch. Luna also doesn't seem to be the type to socialize. -Barb, whose in-laws grew up on the same block, but didn't meet until after high school. From thursnext at yahoo.com Thu Dec 9 17:37:34 2004 From: thursnext at yahoo.com (thursnext) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 17:37:34 -0000 Subject: SHIP: Ron & Hermione (was Re: Hermione's Patronus) In-Reply-To: <20041208193825.DYDN8465.mta10.adelphia.net@steveupstairs> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119601 > "mcmaxslb" wrote: > Hermione's otter patronus has nothing to do with any possible R/Hr > ship(ick). I read that in an online chat that JKR stated that she's given us all plenty of hints about the Ron/Hermione thing. We all know how that's going to turn out. Dawn From shawn.beach.sp54 at statefarm.com Thu Dec 9 20:51:20 2004 From: shawn.beach.sp54 at statefarm.com (Shawn Beach) Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 14:51:20 -0600 Subject: Fear of Lupin irrational? Message-ID: <2B9A62557E99C24B851B0C736AE2773901E874A9@WPSBJZYF.opr.statefarm.org> No: HPFGUIDX 119602 Cory: > Perhaps a better comparison is a person with a treatable mental > disorder that, if untreated, causes violent psychotic outbursts. > I can certainly sympathize with such a person, but that doesn't > mean I'm going to be 100% comfortable letting my child by taught > by someone who might kill them the first time he forgets to take > his meds. Now Shawn: I don't think I'd have a problem with a werewolf teacher for a school where children are only there during the day. Not really a chance of old wolfy popping out. Of course, I guess there are those times when the full moon is visible during the daylight. Never mind then. Shawn From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Fri Dec 10 01:14:55 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 01:14:55 -0000 Subject: Lupin, Snape and Potions (was Re: Is Snape really THAT good in Potions?( In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119603 > Potioncat: > I agree, that the only character who ever speaks about Snape's skill > at potions is Lupin. Now, if the reader feels Lupin is pretty much > trustworthy, the reader will believe him. If the reader feels he is > ESE or just not trustworthy, the reader will reserve judgement. I > will have to say that I am enough of a hypocrit to believe Lupin is > correct about Snape, but may not be telling the truth about himself. > Neri: As Boyd recently told us, it is pretty limited to consider a character either hypocrite or trustworthy, either saint or ESE. Instead we should consider the whole arc of this character and, I'd add, the situation in which he told us any canon "fact". One of Lupin's most obvious character qualities is that he is very modest and understated. I can't recall him ever claiming to be an authority on anything, not even things he is obviously very good at, but he'll readily tell you how much any other person (including Snape) is good and kind and courageous. Pretty logical too, in his situation: if he draws too much attention to himself, even positive attention, his secret might be revealed. When I hear Lupin saying something like "I'm not an expert on X" I get suspicious. I don't suspect him to be an ESE because he says Voldemort's name and because he repeatedly shows his capability for empathy, especially for hurt people and victims of wrongdoing, but I do suspect him to hide his own abilities. > Potioncat: > I don't think it is reasonable to think Lupin took Potions after OWL > level. I don't doubt that if he did take it, he did well at it. > But I don't think we have any idea what he took. No, I take that > back. I'll bet he took DADA. I think he took Charms and > Transfigurations. I'm basing that on what I think we've see him > doing at Hogwarts and at GP. > I would bet that neither James nor Sirius took Potions and that in > itself may have kept Remus out of it. Neri: I think I'd take that bet. Potions is an important subject and James was a head boy, which requires academic excellency. And do you think head girl Lily also didn't take Potions? More probably she did, and James followed her there, and the other three marauders probably followed James. Morover, we don't know who was the Potions teacher back then, but there's no reason to assume that he/she was as terrifying as Professor Snape is, nor require such an absurdly high mark to get into the NEWT class. Potions in the 70s may have been a popular subject. > Potioncat: > Or he may have avoided > Potions to avoid Severus. Neri: Why would he avoid Severus? Lupin is hardly a coward. He may have a problem standing up to his friends, but not to his enemies. > Potioncat: > Keep in mind, wolfsbane hadn't been > invented yet, so there wasn't that motivation. > Neri: But there was probably some research in the field, and there was the hope of discovering a cure, and there was the motivation to prove himself and prove DD right when admitting him. > Potioncat: > My point is, we don't have any canon to tell us what NEWT level > courses any of the Marauders took. But even I have to smile at the > idea of Remus and Severus in Potions together and Remus getting a > better grade! > Neri: Only because fandom!Snape is a Potions genius. When I consider canon!Snape and canon!Lupin, I prefer to reserve judgment. However, I agree that it won't be in character for Lupin to get the highest grade in any class. Better make sure it's only the second highest grade, and avoid drawing too much attention. Neri From javalorum at yahoo.ca Thu Dec 9 22:13:01 2004 From: javalorum at yahoo.ca (javalorum) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 22:13:01 -0000 Subject: Snape and McGonagall Re: Snape and Lupin's Character Arcs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119604 > Lupinlore wrote: > Welcome, Java. Don't worry, a little bluntness often helps around > here. We have a way of going round and round like a dog chasing > its tail. Thanks for being so kind! > I agree that Sirius is a very sad character. I don't think there > was quite as much time as you suppose, only 2-3 years. I'm also > not so sure his experiences after school would be all that great. > A lot of people who have a great time at school because of looks > and charisma find that the "real" world isn't so amenable. It may > well be that Sirius was disappointed in what he found after Hogwarts > and was already developing a tendancy to try and hang on to the good > old days, even before going to Azkaban. Something related but slightly off-topic. Sometimes I wonder why almost all wizard-wizard couples in HP books were Hogwarts schoolmates. It just makes wiards look kind of plain (if not ultra conservative): you go to school, meet your sweetheart and then marry him/her right after graduation. Must be a really small social circle for wizards. About hanging on to good times, I guess everybody is different. For myself, high school was a blast. The time after that, college etc, was nowhere near that fun level, and the people I like the most, to this day, are still my high school friends. Nonetheless, now looking back, I see myself learning more from this period, thinking more maturely, and the way I see the world now just relate more to this period than high school. High school was simply fun and enjoyment, but life goes on after that. Sirius fought in a real war after school, even if it was only 2-3 years, shouldn't that give him a bit of maturity? But then, we could also argue that Sirius said when he was in prison, he could only cling onto school days to stay positive. Maybe he just got too much into it. I guess that's the sad part. > I agree that Snape is an over-the-top character who just isn't very > believable at times. As you say, it's hard to imagine that someone > who's lived 20+ years after Hogwarts and gone on to be a Death > Eater wouldn't have greater scars than a rivalry with a school jock. > Of course wounds inflicted in childhood tend to be the worst and > longest lasting, but still. I was more surprised that he didn't choose the time when his parents were arguing in front of him as his worst memory. I always thought childhood memories, especially the ones involving parents, have stronger effect than some silly schoolmates (then again, everybody is different). I can see why the author wants to move Snape's "worst memory" to a later chapter, so that she could build up the situation to make it more significant (because to Harry, after all that questioning and daring, it'll be quite disappointing to see Snape's worst memory has nothing to do with him. In this book, almost all of the character's interaction is about Harry.) And that's probably why I wasn't very impressed with OotP. Too many paragraphs were wasted setting up things that turned out to be unfit, or insignificant. A significant part of the chapters doesn't build up characters, push the plot forward at all. (Does Harry's every dream regarding the department of mysteries have to be described in detail - - while most of them are the same? Does Hagrid's scar and strange behavior has to be recorded every time he shows up, to such details that we already knew? A good writer should be able be concise while remain effective.) And on top of that, I guess Harry being so self- involved didn't help either. > I also agree that Snape serves as a "moral device." We have five > characters now with terrible (or at least challenging) childhoods: > Harry, Snape, Sirius, Lupin, and Voldemort/Riddle. Four of them > have never managed to overcome those childhoods. Sirius perhaps > didn't have a fair chance, but nevertheless he tried to remain the > reckless jock he was at Hogwarts. Riddle becomes evil. Snape > poisons his soul with so much bitterness and anger that he becomes > a twisted emotional cripple. Lupin develops an unhealthy desire to > please people and be liked. Each of these represents a path that > Harry should avoid. This, I completely agree. (Maybe except for the Lupin part. I always thought he was kinda wise like a buddist, and has risen above his childhood already.) Thanks for your attention, again! Amy From elsyee_h at yahoo.com Fri Dec 10 01:35:45 2004 From: elsyee_h at yahoo.com (Tammy) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 01:35:45 -0000 Subject: New Here - 1st Post: The mirror Sirius gave Harry in Book 5 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119605 errx2 wrote: > > This may be a stupid question but. . . it has been bugging me since I > finished the book months ago. At the end of the Book, Harry finds > the mirror Sirius gave him and tries to call Sirius. Could he have > used the mirror all along to reach Sirius instead of the fire, etc.? > If not, why not? If so, why didn't Sirius just remind him to use the > mirror? > > If anyone is kind enough to answer, please be gentle with me. I read > all the books one right after the other and have not reread any, > yet. I guess I'm a late bloomer, and I'm glad of it too. I would > have gone nuts waiting years for the next book. Tammy replies: JKR said that the mirror wouldn't have helped as much as people think it would (or something to that effect, once again I'm too lazy to look it up). What that means, I have no clue... I read a theory posted by someone here (forget who, it's that darn swiss cheese memory of mine, apologies to the theorist) that Kreacher stole the mirror and that's why it wouldn't have helped any. As for why Sirius didn't remind him the one time, perhaps it was because Lupin was there as well, and Lupin didn't know that Sirius had given Harry the mirror... I suppose that's been incorporated into someone's ESE!Lupin or ESE!Sirius theory as well :P -Tammy, who apologies for any lack of cohesion in her posts as she spent all day baking cookies. From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Fri Dec 10 02:10:04 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 02:10:04 -0000 Subject: Potions and checks (was Re: Fear of Lupin irrational? )(Was: Sexuality In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119606 > > > catkind: > > > But if that is the scenario, doesn't it make Dumbledore guilty > of gross negligence? At the very least there should have been a > double-check on Lupin taking the potion. > > > > > > Mind you, Dumbledore is pretty reckless in general. > > > > Potioncat: > > The double check may have been that Snape would both brew > the potion and see that Lupin got it. Of course, on that one > evening he takes it to Lupin, sees the map and forgets it just like > Lupin did.< > > Pippin: > Or Snape knew that the goblet of potion, which he advised Lupin > to drink "directly" earlier in the story, would have broken down or > evaporated by the time he caught up with Lupin. It smokes, so > apparently it's not very stable. He does inform Lupin that he's > forgotten to take it. Lupin's failure to react to this information is > very strange, and would certainly account for Snape's refusal to > take him or Sirius seriously about the rat. > Neri: I doubt Snape thought Lupin's failure to react is strange, because he didn't really allow Lupin to react. First he cut his words, then he told him he is going to Azkaban, then he shut his mouth with a spell. My guess is that none of the six people in the shack, including Snape and Lupin himself, remembered that this night would be a full moon night. Lupin explains that he has to take the potion during the whole week before the full moon. So he probably looks at the lunar chart, finds out that the fool moon will be rising late at night this month, and then starts taking the potion seven days before. Each evening Lupin takes his cup from Snape and nothing unusual happens. Then both Lupin and Snape, in their excitement, lose count and forget that this is the seventh night. Both of them don't act in the Shack as if a transformation is due any minute. However, I do think it was Lupin's responsibility and I agree that he is too dangerous around children. I think Lupin himself agrees with this or he wouldn't have resigned. This is Lupin's tragedy, and why his character is deep and fascinating. Making him ESE would completely spoil this whole effect, because ESE!Lupin wouldn't care much who he bites by mistake. Neri From snow15145 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 10 02:40:30 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 02:40:30 -0000 Subject: Angry Harry in HBP? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119607 imamommy: I would expect the boy to display the classic five steps of grief: shock, denial, anger/bargaining, depression, and acceptance. These are the five steps people go through when something else traumatic happens to them. Each of these steps is essential to mental health for the individual. Snow: This statement reminded me of the book The Five People You Meet In Heaven. You only see your life from your perspective, not what others actually have done that was misconstrued by you at the time, similar to Harry only seeing Snape as a former death-eater who hated his father and his Godfather Sirius. Harry cannot recognize Snape and his actions for what they are because he has not been privy to Snape's agenda. If Harry had been Eddie in the book The Five People You Meet In Heaven, Snape would surely have been one of his teachers. imamommy: So, at the end of OoP, we definitely see Harry in shock. We will probably see him either in the denial or anger/bargaining phase at the beginning of HBP, and over the course of the sixth and seventh book, see him progress throughdepression to eventual acceptance. Snow: Actually, I thought Harry had displayed every emotion so far except acceptance. I think Harry showed his denial for Sirius' death when he first entered DD's office and Phineas spoke of being sent to deliver another message to Sirius, Harry couldn't tell Phineas what happened because Harry felt that if he said aloud that Sirius was dead "it would be to make it final, absolute, irretrievable." Anger had been displayed the most in DD's office when Harry broke everything he could lay his hands on but refrained from grabbing DD himself. I believe Harry has also gone through the depression stage when he wants to be around others until he is there and his thoughts are with Sirius, another place he doesn't really want to be. Harry sits on the shore of the great lake hearing and seeing others but felt so apart from them. >Snip< imamommy: Often this kind of depression causes a falling out with old friends, and hanging around new friends who tend to have a demoralizing effect on the teenager. I don't see Harry chumming up to Draco & Co., but is there anyone else he could escape to as a departure from Ron and Hermione? Theodore Nott, perhaps? Snow: I doubt Harry will be drawn to the dark side. Luna however fits the bill quite nicely. imamommy: I think he will withdraw from Hermione especially for a time. She tends to be his voice of reason and conscience, and I think he will want to escape that voice for a while. Snow: Oh, the voice of reason when everything around Harry is unreasonable. Yes! Harry won't want to hear all the psychiatric reasons of why or how he feels the way he does. Luna on the other hand offers answers, even if they are from a questionable source. Harry's final acceptance may be found in his dear friend Hermione, whom Harry would avoid like the plague because Hermione equals expectance. I can defiantly see this happening. From willsonkmom at msn.com Fri Dec 10 03:07:21 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 03:07:21 -0000 Subject: Lupin, Snape and Potions (was Re: Is Snape really THAT good in Potions?( In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119608 > > Neri: > I think I'd take that bet. Potions is an important subject and James > was a head boy, which requires academic excellency. And do you think > head girl Lily also didn't take Potions? More probably she did, and > James followed her there, and the other three marauders probably > followed James. Morover, we don't know who was the Potions teacher > back then, but there's no reason to assume that he/she was as > terrifying as Professor Snape is, nor require such an absurdly high > mark to get into the NEWT class. Potions in the 70s may have been a > popular subject. Potioncat: I was merely pointing out reasons why Lupin might not have taken Potions. I still maintain there is nothing in canon that tells us or even hints as to whether he took Potions. If you can ask for canon to determine Snape's true skill in potions, I can ask for canon to determine which classes Lupin took. We saw in Career Advice that the courses you took depended on what career you planned to seek. Just like in the RW. But we don't know what sort of work he hoped to do. So while Lupin may have taken potions, he may not have. And I still say, whatever our own opinions are, we do not have canon to tell us. I suggested 3 courses based on the things we saw him do in PoA and in OoP. Someone else has pointed out that several potions depend on certain phases of the moon or on a full month of brewing. That would be hard for Lupin to manage. And while it looks as if I'm trying to argue that he did not take potions, I am saying we don't know. As for his being ESE...well, thanks to Pippin I do wonder. So on Monday, Wednesday and Friday I think he is ESE. On Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday I think he is not ESE and on Sunday I don't think about it. Potioncat From snow15145 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 10 03:33:36 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 03:33:36 -0000 Subject: New Here - 1st Post: The mirror Sirius gave Harry in Book 5 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119609 This may be a stupid question but. . . it has been bugging me since I finished the book months ago. At the end of the Book, Harry finds the mirror Sirius gave him and tries to call Sirius. Could he have used the mirror all along to reach Sirius instead of the fire, etc.? If not, why not? If so, why didn't Sirius just remind him to use the mirror? If anyone is kind enough to answer, please be gentle with me. I read all the books one right after the other and have not reread any, yet. I guess I'm a late bloomer, and I'm glad of it too. I would have gone nuts waiting years for the next book. errx2 Snow: Welcome to the site where you will find many nuts who have waited so long that some of us have considered everyone to be ESE (ever so evil). Your question is not stupid just not satisfyingly answerable. JKR's answer on her web site that the mirror may not have helped as much as you think but may help more than you think (not verbatim) allowed me to question my favorite character in the series; Sirius. If Harry were to have contacted Sirius, alone, via the mirror and Sirius isn't who we have been led to believe he now is, what answer would Sirius have given to Harry about what Harry had seen? If Harry is to use the mirror now but the mirror is at Sirius' house at Grimmald Place what might he see and hear possibly from Phineas questioning Kreacher about his great, great grandson? There are many scenarios that could take place but I doubt that Sirius took the mirror with him to the Ministry, after all Harry didn't take his. From snow15145 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 10 03:59:47 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 03:59:47 -0000 Subject: Lupin, Snape and Potions (was Re: Is Snape really THAT good in Potions?( In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119611 Potioncat: I was merely pointing out reasons why Lupin might not have taken Potions. I still maintain there is nothing in canon that tells us or even hints as to whether he took Potions. If you can ask for canon to determine Snape's true skill in potions, I can ask for canon to determine which classes Lupin took. Snow: I believe there may be evidence of both the fact that Lupin, at the very least, attempted potions class and the fact that Lupin acknowledges Snape's superiority in Potions: POA Flight of the Fat Lady- "Professor Snape has very kindly concocted a potion for me," he said. "I have never been much of a potion-brewer and this one is particularly complex." Hope it helps in your discussion. Snow From imamommy at sbcglobal.net Fri Dec 10 04:23:12 2004 From: imamommy at sbcglobal.net (imamommy at sbcglobal.net) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 04:23:12 -0000 Subject: Sexuality as a theme in HP (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119613 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cat_kind" wrote: > > Olivier wrote: > > Some read HP books as mysteries, other like to see them as of the > > adventure and fantasy genre, and some as fairy-tales. There are even > > readers that see in them deep christian or symbolic meaning. In this > > post, I try to explore the way I read them: as the journey from boyhood > > to manhood, with an explicit reference to sexuality. snip> > catkind: I have to admit, my first reaction to this post was to laugh > aloud. You can Freudian-analyse anything, and a world full of wands > and broomsticks is asking for trouble. > > But to some extent I feel you're not even doing F reudian analysis so > much as playing the teenaged-boy-game of going "snigger, snigger, > nudge,nudge" whenever anyone says anything. For example, substituting > rape for every other kind of violence, and substituting sexual desire > for every other emotion (Harry is supposed to learn to control his > *anger*, as McG explicitly states elsewhere) as in the above quote, is > just not playing fair IMHO. Snip > I would strongly debate your claims that the books make "explicit > reference to sexuality" - perhaps explicit wasn't the word you were > looking for? Whatever messages you are reading into it, they're very > much implicit. catkind, hoping it is not being offensive. imamommy I think truth is as truth does, so to speak. There is Truth and Wisdom contained in these books, which allows them to speak to many, many different readers. I think a lot of the interpretative differences depend on the "lens" if you will that each of us uses to view the world. My guess, Olivier, is that you tend to view life in general through sexual metaphor, am I correct? I am a Christian, and yes I do see some Christian symbolism, because that is the view I have of the world. I don't think JKR is intending allegory here, in any sense. I think she just writes the story that is bursting to come out, and I dont' know how conciously she thinks, well, I'd better have an Aids patient, and I'd better have this group or that group represented. I think she makes it up, and we interpret it according to our own "lens". JRR Tolkein rather than CS Lewis, you might say. Thanks to the Lexicon, I reference a CBC interview with JKR from October 23, 2000: Rogers: Jo, there's lots of fun and fantasy in these books, but there are also life lessons in these stories. What did you intend to write when you started? Rowling: Initially, I intended to write a story. No more or no less than that. I love stories. We need stories, I think. Every 'message' - and I put that in heavily inverted commas because I don't set out to teach people specific things... I never sit down at the beginning of a novel and think 'What is today's lesson?' Those lessons, they grow naturally out of the book and I suppose they come naturally from me. imamommy From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 10 04:33:11 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 04:33:11 -0000 Subject: Sexuality as a theme in HP (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119614 Olivier: huge snip of the fascinating post Snape is a much more complex character. I suspect he represents the more scaring and disturbing part of sexuality: its darkest, usually repressed, aspects. Alla: Very interesting discussion. I am not sure if I agree with ONLY sexuality based interpretation of the events and characters actions, but this is very thought provoking indeed. Now, I suppose all my musings eventually come back to Snape and Harry. :o) If Snape represents dark aspects of sexuality, is there any way at all that Harry's encounters with him could somehow help Harry? In a symbolic way I mean? Should Harry try to learn it and embrace the knowledge in order to continue his quest to adulthood? Should Harry confront it and triumph over it? Will it be triumpth over dark parts of his subconscious? Catkind: Do you really think Harry could have performed a cruciatus at the beginning of OotP Alla: Not sure about Pippin, but I don't think so, especially in light of the fact that Harry does save Dudley despite the earlier taunting. In light of "cruciatus attempt" I guess I have a question - what about Bella? What does she represent if we go with this interpretation? Koinonia: huge snip. So what happened to the story about good, evil and choice? Alla: Well, while I also read the books primarily as story about fascinating characters who have to choose between good and evil. I do think that it is possible that JKR put sexual themes in there too at least as secondary ones. I don't think she meant to put in explicit sexual references, but subtle, why not? Maybe she wanted to have some fun, if indeed she is writing books for herself. (Mind you, I still believe that she oriented them to younger audience). From tonks_op at yahoo.com Fri Dec 10 05:57:03 2004 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 05:57:03 -0000 Subject: Warlock/Wizard - was Asking JKR just one question In-Reply-To: <767D98BAB669E74E8CFCB861554159FB0484B100@ecsube2.ec-admin.easternct.edu> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119615 Reading all of the post on warlock/wizard.. I am pulling out my hair.. agh!!! I know that we are all Harry Potter fans here and not students of real Witchcraft/ Wizardry... but if you pick up any book on the subject it will tell you that: There are different categories of magic practitioners. The sorcerer is the lowest and most likely to use dark magic. A warlock and witch are the same thing.. different sex. A wizard is a wise man or wise woman, and the very highest level. The term Wizard is the same as a magus .. plural magi.. as in the Magi who followed the star to the Christ child. There are 2 types of magic.. folk magic and high magic. Sorcerers, witches and warlocks use the lower form.. folk magic. A wizard can use fork magic too. But, ONLY a Wizard uses High Magic. I'd say some folks..,, no names have fallen asleep in their History of Magic class!!! So when DD is a sorcerer, a warlock, and a wizard.. it is like saying he has a BA, MA, and PHD. What I what to know is what is a Mugwamp? ;-) Tonks_op From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Fri Dec 10 04:09:35 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 20:09:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Petunia and Voldemort (was Various) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041210040935.32550.qmail@web53107.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119616 > Ginger said: > >...edited... > > > >Perhaps LV killed the parents to show Petunia his > power, and then > >(instead of trying to AK her) tells her that if she > doesn't give him > >the answers he wants that the same fate awaits her > and/or Vernon and > >Dudley. She would have been far willing to take in > Harry to be > >pretected from LV, if this was part of the deal. > Janet replied: > Another possible flaw is that if Voldemort wanted > answers from either > Petunia or her parents, he would get more use out of > an Imperio than out of > an AK. He'd then know for sure that they did not > know where the Potters > were. Not that he might not kill the parents on > general principles (or to > try to flush the Potters out of hiding) ... > Juli: But do you think Petunia would have taken Harry in to her home if she had "really" known what LV can do? The letter from DD must have said something like, LV killed Lily, take care into you home and only there he will be safe from any dangers. She took Harry AFTER LV was gone, so there really wasn't a lot of danger (at least to some), So my guess is that she took Hatty only because once she loved her sister. Thinking about Janet's idea, Do we know if muggles can be imperio'd? Juli __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - now with 250MB free storage. Learn more. http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250 From martyb1130 at aol.com Fri Dec 10 04:16:00 2004 From: martyb1130 at aol.com (martyb1130 at aol.com) Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 23:16:00 EST Subject: Sirius' Death Message-ID: <12a.5253c881.2eea7d00@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119617 Hello everyone! I was wondering something. When Sirius died at the department of mysteries, his human self had been gone and apparently lost forever. Do you think that it is possible that the human part of you can die and the animagus part live? I Know that it sounds a little farfetched but after all Peter Pettigrew had lived on after his incident and nobody knew about it for years later. Brodeur From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Fri Dec 10 04:17:48 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 20:17:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: Petunia and Voldemort (was Various) In-Reply-To: <20041209211210.74027.qmail@web52008.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041210041748.35217.qmail@web53107.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119618 > Luckdragon's theory: > I have a theory that the reason Voldemort attacked > the Potters was because they were in possession of the > Sorcerer's stone to prevent Voldemort from getting it, and > possibly to protect Harry after the prophecy led them to go > into hiding. When the curse backfired he was unable to get > the stone and Dunbledore had it placed in the Gringott's > vault until Harry's return at which time they thought it > would be safer at Hogwarts. If the stone had been in Harry's > crib it could have taken a part in preventing the AK curse > from hurting him and may even have played a part in why > Voldemort did not die when the curse backfired. Interesting as your post is, I don't think the Potter ever had the Philosopher's stone, if they did, why did James and Lily die? They shouldn't have since the Stone makes the 'owner' immortal, and the two of them were not immortal, or maybe they're immortal the way elves in Tolkien's world are: they don't die of old age but they can be killed in battle. Dunno. Also I don't think DD would have let them get the stone, only those who actually discovered it should be able to use it, and the only one we know in N. Flamel and his wife. This may sound selfish, but not everyone should have immortality and wealth it just takes off-balance the universe, at least IMO. Juli From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Fri Dec 10 04:31:18 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 20:31:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Who is Mr Prentice? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041210043118.85086.qmail@web53108.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119619 Juli earlier: >>Oh, it's just Mr Prentice don't put your wand away, boy, don't I keep telling> you I'm no use?' (OoP, Ch 2, A Peck of Owls) My question is Who is Mr Prentice? Is he a muggle, a Squib, a wizard? Francois replied: >>I always thought that he's nothing more than just a "random muggle"... ;-) Geoff answered: He's actually a second cousin to Mark Evans....:-)) Juli again: I get what you're saying, it's another meaningless name just like Mark Evans or any of the other kid that Dudley got into a fight with. OK so I'm obsessed and I keep looking for any hiden clues. But couldn't Mr Prentice be another Squib also watching Harry? Juli __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From sterna_caspia at yahoo.com Fri Dec 10 07:06:20 2004 From: sterna_caspia at yahoo.com (elizabeth donelan) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 07:06:20 -0000 Subject: Hermione's Patonus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119620 > Steve here: > > Well that clears up why Hermione's patronus is an otter. > > But what about the references to other otter related > > animals around the Burrow? > Potioncat: > Aren't ferrets part of the otter/weasel family? Otters, weasels, ferrets, skunks are all in the family Mustelidae. Not only is the otter JKP's favorite animal, she said she likes the whole family in general. Mustelids are the most ferocious mammals by body size (the only mammals that regularly takes prey larger than itself). I know this post is older, but I'd thought I'd use my science nerd powers for good. Anyway I'm new, but I've just re-read all the books, and am loving the rabid enthusiasm of this group! I'm seeing the books in a whole new light. liz From gbannister10 at aol.com Fri Dec 10 07:48:29 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 07:48:29 -0000 Subject: Warlock/Wizard - was Asking JKR just one question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119621 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tonks" wrote: Tonks_op: > So when DD is a sorcerer, a warlock, and a wizard.. it is like > saying he has a BA, MA, and PHD. What I what to know is what is a > Mugwamp? Geoff: This proved interesting. I have always met "mugwump" used in the UK as a largely friendly expression to someone who has failed to grasp something which is quite simple. However, on turning to one of my dictionaries, I was interested to find: 'Mugwump > noun N.Amer. a person who remains aloof or independent, especially from party politics. ORIGIN - Algonquian "great chief".' "Supreme Mugwump" therefore seems a suitable title for Dumbledore. Well, well. How true that we learn something new every day.... especially at 7.45 am! Geoff http://www.aspectsofexmoor.com From olivier.fouquet+harry at m4x.org Fri Dec 10 09:46:16 2004 From: olivier.fouquet+harry at m4x.org (olivier.fouquet+harry at m4x.org) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 10:46:16 +0100 Subject: Sexuality as a theme Message-ID: <5630362E-4A90-11D9-B2B4-000A95665DE8@m4x.org> No: HPFGUIDX 119622 My post #119563 has had much more success than I would have thought, well at least if severe criticism is counted as success :-). I want to clarify a bit some of the most shocking things I wrote and I'll try to answer some of the questions. First and foremost, I want to make it perfectly clear that I don't read HP only has a sexual metaphor, nor primarily as a sexual metaphor. I fully agree with posters like catkind or koinonia that the story is not about sexuality, but about choices, good and evil etc. These aspects are often discussed on this list and elsewhere, and rightly so because they are indeed the core of the Harry Potter saga. I also completely agree that HP is enjoyable based on its intrigue and its mysteries and not because it may contain symbolism. But twists, turns and far-fetched theories about this or that are the daily bread of this list. What I wanted to do is to try to show that it is possible that there are other theme touched by JKR. To do so, I tried to give some evidence of (what I see as possible) sexual references and symbolism, and I tried to show that this symbolism, if accepted, is quite consistent (for example Snape does fulfill the same symbolic role throughout the series). It is my opinion that many other instances exist (especially concerning Neville, Aragog, Hagrid...). Maybe I will write about it later. Now to some of the specific criticism. Catkind: >I have to admit, my first reaction to this post was to laugh >aloud. You can Freudian-analyse anything, and a world full of wands >and broomsticks is asking for trouble. >But to some extent I feel you're not even doing Freudian analysis so >much as playing the teenaged-boy-game of going "snigger, snigger, >nudge,nudge" whenever anyone says anything. You are perfectly right: I am not doing Freudian analysis, I am absolutely not qualified to do so, having a very superficial knowledge of it. However, I hope I am not simply trying to be a dirty teenager. When a story reaches so many people anywhere in the world, when it is powerful enough so that thousands of people invest enormous energy to it, I think it is reasonable to surmise that it rings deep in human subconscious. Sexuality is a part of it (a small part but one that is not too often discussed on this list). As I said in my answer to Kneasy, I do think that JKR purposefully inserted this theme in HP, especially in CoS and PoA. My post #83372 covers this in much more details. Catkind: >I agree that the books are very much about growing up, but that is >true whether one substitutes sex for every other feature of adulthood >or not. catkind, hoping it is not being offensive. Absolutely agreed. Many other features of adulthood are much more prominently featured than sexuality, but I do think sexuality is there too, and in this particular post, I was interested in it. Oh, and no, it is absolutely not too offensive. "K": >Let me state I read these books for the mysteries, fantasy and >adventure. I guess all the explicit sexual references are passing >way over my head. I just don't see it. My comments are not said in a >mocking or rude way. I just want to state I disagree with your take >on the books. >I see none in the examples you have given. I guess we just read the >books differently. That's perfectly OK. In fact, I think I wouldn't have noticed it either if I hadn't started with CoS and with the voiced intent to show that HP books where just for children. My aim being to show how shallow they were, I was surprised to see it wasn't so. For the record, I also read them for the mysteries, fantasy and adventure. imamommy >I think a lot of the interpretative differences depend on the "lens" >if you will that each of us uses to view the world. My guess, >Olivier, is that you tend to view life in general through sexual >metaphor, am I correct? I am a Christian, and yes I do see some >Christian symbolism, because that is the view I have of the world. I do too. I would have been extremely surprised if JKR had denied any involvement in the Christian faith. Many posters >Does anyone agree that Lupin could represent paedophilia? I don't. As Siriusly Snapey Susan correctly remarked in her answer, this is Isabelle Smadja idea. I mentioned it for the sake of completeness. Now to more specific criticisms Many posters >That particular interpretation about this or that never entered my mind. That's understandable. JKR very openly deals with subjects like choices, discrimination, bigotry, intolerance. On the other hand, when she writes about sexuality (if she does), it is always in a very restraint and subtle way. By the way, that's why I enjoy it, too many "in your face" sexual angst would spoil the books for me. If I had to make an argument that at least in one instance in the book, she writes about sexuality, I would choose either the "Percy situation" or Moaning Myrtle description of her own death (both in CoS). Let's see in the text: Ch.3 p.28 "Percy has been acting very oddly this summer [...]. He has been [...] spending a load of time shut up in his room... I mean, there's only so many times you can polish a prefect badge." Further, Ch.16 p.212 "Well, er, if you must know, Ginny, er, walked in on me the other day when I was - well, never mind - the point is , she saw me doing something and I, um, I asked her not to mention it to anybody." As for Myrtle: (Ch.16 p.221) "it was dreadful, she said with relish[...]. I remember it so well. I'd hidden because [snip] was teasing me. [...] I heard somebody come in. They said something funny. Anyway what really got me was that it was a boy speaking.[...]. I just remember seeing a pair of big yellow eyes. My whole body sort of seized up and then I was floating away ... She looked dreamily at Harry." Many posters >If one accepts your interpretations, JKR has a pretty warped up take on sexuality. No, no, I must have been extremely unclear or unable to express myself correctly. On the contrary, I think JKR is very delicate and sane when it comes to that. Everything is always extremely allusive and even if one reads with the sole intent to find sexual symbolism, it is my opinion that one will find a very healthy picture of sexuality. For instance, I argued in earlier posts that CoS is about the danger of early sexuality for young teens and that PoA is about the difficult quest of a positive masculine identity (don't mistaken me, CoS and PoA aren't solely about that nor even primarily about that). Both books end with a very positive and encouraging take on these two subjects in my opinion. Catkind >You have written in the sexual symbolism yourself Koinonia >Snape and uneasiness towards sexuality? How in the >world have I missed this? >See, I believe more than anything these kind of remarks just show >where the mind of the reader is. If a person is determined/wants to >find sexual references throughout this book or any other they will >do so. I doubt I have written in the sexuality. Many other readers on this list have written posts about it way before I even read the first HP book. It has also been the theme of one of the Keynote at the Nimbus Three symposium (or so I have been told in post #83402). Well, other people can make the same mistakes I make, that's true. However, Catkind, if you are in any sense interested in continuing this discussion, I would like you to at least take a quick look at my post 83372. Then we can discuss if indeed CoS is entirely devoid of sexual symbolism or if maybe there are at least hints that it could be a theme. You can challenge my arguments of course. As for Snape and uneasiness towards sexuality? Well, these are a few possible argument. Out of the four memories we have of Snape, two are directly concerned with uneasy sexuality (at least inasmuch girl/boy relationship reflects sexuality) and one of the other (parents fighting) also touches on relationships. Many people on this list think that Snape is a vampire, or at least that he carries some vampire symbolism. Vampire are common literature icon for dark aspects of sexuality (I am NOT making this up, check say en.wikipedia/wiki/Vampire). Snape is creepy, ugly, lives in a disgusting, cold, place with dead animals floating in bottles. Check out from a psychoanalysis book what those may represent symbolically. Snape is Neville's boggart. Not Voldemort, not Bellatrix who tortured his parents into madness: Snape. What is one of the main scene where Snape scares Neville? When he threatens to poison Trevor. Check out what toad is commonly associated to in fairy tales psychology (you guessed it but I don't want to be accused of writing things in). Snape hates Sirius. JKR herself wrote on her site that Sirius is sexy. One of Snape's first sentences is that he will teach "the delicate power of liquids that creep through human veins." Liquids. So he cannot refer to blood only. Snape has a huge success in every kind of sexual fan fiction, indicating that to some fans at least, he may be related to this theme. Of course, all these arguments are circular in a sense. If you don't accept psychoanalysis, you can dispute each and every of the examples I cited. To tell you the truth, I am not even sure I believe in this kind of psychoanalysis reading myself. But I perceive a certain consistency in these possibly random symbols so I think it is at least valid to try to explore this line of thinking. Thanks to all the posters that expressed interest. Olivier From finwitch at yahoo.com Fri Dec 10 10:04:52 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 10:04:52 -0000 Subject: Who is Mr Prentice? In-Reply-To: <20041210043118.85086.qmail@web53108.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119623 > Juli: -- OK so I'm obsessed and I > keep looking for any hiden clues. But couldn't Mr > Prentice be another Squib also watching Harry? Finwitch: Not so sure - if his first name begins with an A and middle name with a P you get A.P.Prentice - apprentice. Could he be an apprentice to someone? Dumbledore, perhaps? Finwitch From cmjohnstone at hotmail.com Fri Dec 10 11:29:45 2004 From: cmjohnstone at hotmail.com (littleleahstill) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 11:29:45 -0000 Subject: Who is Mr Prentice Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119624 Juli, I got quite excited over who Mr Prentice might be, an apprentice of Dumbledore's or of Nicholas Flamel's or a cat on the Mr Tiddles line, but alas JKR put paid to this bit of speculation when answering the 'who is Mark Evans?' questions on her website. The relevant quote is: "He's nobody in the sense that Mr. Prentice, Madame Marsh, and Gordon- Dudley's- gang-member are nobodies, just background characters who need names, but have no role other than the walk-on parts assigned to them." Sigh! Leah From wulfkub at wulfkub.com Fri Dec 10 12:03:18 2004 From: wulfkub at wulfkub.com (Amanda) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 07:03:18 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Sexuality as a theme in HP (long) References: Message-ID: <002b01c4deb0$3f13f760$0402a8c0@carolina.rr.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119625 > Alla: > > Not sure about Pippin, but I don't think so, especially in light of > the fact that Harry does save Dudley despite the earlier taunting. > > In light of "cruciatus attempt" I guess I have a question - what > about Bella? What does she represent if we go with this > interpretation? Kethryn now - If you go with the sexual interpretation and say that Snape represents the darker side of sex (I think that's a bit too broad, I would narrow it down to say that he represents the darker side of desire that he has to fight), then Bella represents a dominatrix. And, like all good doms, she plays sub as well, sub to Voldemort for sure...maybe sub to Lestrange as well (although I tend to doubt that). Kethryn who has a calculus final in *EEEK* an hour. I will expand on this idea if there is interest. From finwitch at yahoo.com Fri Dec 10 12:26:46 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 12:26:46 -0000 Subject: Lupin, Snape and Potions (was Re: Is Snape really THAT good in Potions?( In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119626 > Snow: > > I believe there may be evidence of both the fact that Lupin, at the > very least, attempted potions class and the fact that Lupin > acknowledges Snape's superiority in Potions: > > POA Flight of the Fat Lady- "Professor Snape has very kindly > concocted a potion for me," he said. "I have never been much of a > potion-brewer and this one is particularly complex." Finwitch: Hmm - Lupin has one problem in Potions he cannot overcome, practically displayed with two potion-problems: 1) Some potion ingredients must be gathered during Full Moon - I recall that Polyjuice required such. (and Lupin quite *obviously* cannot do that. Wolfsbane may be one of those Potions...!). 2) With some potions it takes a month to brew/prepare an ingredient (this will also include a Full Moon and thus disable any werewolf from brewing it without help). Other than that - so long as there's someone (like Sirius?) to do the things required done during Full Moon, he'll manage. But then, wouldn't it be simpler to just let that 'Full Moon - helper' do it for you? And there may also be that some of them require the use of silver instruments... So Lupin's not much of a Potion-brewer mainly because he's a werewolf. Finwitch From finwitch at yahoo.com Fri Dec 10 12:39:49 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 12:39:49 -0000 Subject: The silver hand (Was: The Darkness Within) In-Reply-To: <120920040231.13541.41B7B9160002BC43000034E52205886360CECFCE0C0A0D979D0E09@comcast.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119627 > Becki has an idea; > First I have to add the dreaded disclaimer about someone else having this idea. I am so far behind, catching up slowly, but this post got me thinkin'. > Perhaps the hand was not conjured out of thin air. Actually, the hand was still in the pot. Could LV have just transfigured it into silver, just changed its properities? (my 10 year old is studying matter right now) Finwitch: I like that, for a start. I'd say that - since the line reads as 'Flesh of the servant, willingly given' - you'll notice that - while it had to be his whole right hand to demonstrate his status as the servant (right hand man), and his *willingness* (gives his right hand for) as well as PP not being under Imperius, and cutting off his hand with a knife - the line *only* includes flesh. I'd say that the flesh in the had became part of the potion restoring Voldemort, and that the rest of the hand bones, nerves, blood, skin and nails - did not. They stayed in the cauldron. Still, I suppose only the MASTER could return the hand, else it would make the part about willingness invalid. It may have been silvery, due to the fact it was still under a spell of replacing flesh - but yes, I think it stays. Finwitch From willsonkmom at msn.com Fri Dec 10 12:43:59 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 12:43:59 -0000 Subject: Lupin, Snape and Potions (was Re: Is Snape really THAT good in Potions?( In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119628 > Snow: > > I believe there may be evidence of both the fact that Lupin, at the very least, attempted potions class and the fact that Lupin > acknowledges Snape's superiority in Potions: > > POA Flight of the Fat Lady- "Professor Snape has very kindly > concocted a potion for me," he said. "I have never been much of a > potion-brewer and this one is particularly complex." > Potioncat: Well, it could be, as Neri thinks, that this is false modesty and Lupin is a fine potion-maker, having taken NEWT level potions. Or it could be very true, and he didn't go beyond OWL level, or he did go beyond OWL, but didn't do so well in NEWT level. But what one means by "never much of potion-brewer" is up for grabs. I mean, I can bake cakes when I have to, but I've never been much of a baker. I think you and I agree that Lupin honestly feels Snape is a better potion-maker. Potioncat From stevejjen at earthlink.net Fri Dec 10 14:25:04 2004 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 14:25:04 -0000 Subject: Sirius' Death & animagus transformations In-Reply-To: <12a.5253c881.2eea7d00@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119629 Brodeur: > Hello everyone! I was wondering something. When Sirius died at the > department of mysteries, his human self had been gone and apparently > lost forever. Do you think that it is possible that the human part > of you can die and the animagus part live? I Know that it sounds a > little farfetched but after all Peter Pettigrew had lived on after > his incident and nobody knew about it for years later. Jen: I guess JKR could do anything she wants, although this might be difficult to make believable. Peter wasn't dead after all, and it does seem to be a complicated process for a human to transform. Implausible but not impossible?!? Which reminds me, why does it take such complexity for a wizard to learn how to transform into an animal, but an animal brain can make the required calculations to turn back into a human? Is it some issue of cellular matter, where your original form is easier to transform back into? It seems like in animal form the wizard is still choosing whether to transform back to human or not. Sirius and Remus had to force Peter to transform and Sirius could sense when he should stay an animal at Azkaban. Jen From meriaugust at yahoo.com Fri Dec 10 14:55:20 2004 From: meriaugust at yahoo.com (meriaugust) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 14:55:20 -0000 Subject: Who is Mr Prentice? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119630 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "finwitch" wrote: > > > > > Juli: > -- OK so I'm obsessed and I > > keep looking for any hiden clues. But couldn't Mr > > Prentice be another Squib also watching Harry? > > Finwitch: > > Not so sure - if his first name begins with an A and middle name with > a P you get A.P.Prentice - apprentice. Could he be an apprentice to > someone? Dumbledore, perhaps? > > Finwitch Meri now: Not to stomp on anyone's fun or anything, but if you look in the FAQ poll on JKR's site where she answers the Mark Evans question I am pretty sure that she says that Mr. Prentice is nobody. A walk on-walk off character who needed a name. He's just a Muggle who lives in Little Whinging. Meri From Snarryfan at aol.com Fri Dec 10 15:00:07 2004 From: Snarryfan at aol.com (evita2fr) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 15:00:07 -0000 Subject: Snape's wound/Dumbledore Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119631 I'm re-reading POA, and I found a phrase I completely forget. In the chapter 9, p166, US edition, when everyone sleeps in the Great Hall (after Sirius's slashed the Fat Lady) and Snape and Dumbledore just talked about Snape's suspicions, and Albus just said to Percy he didn't want dementors in the school. "Percy looked slightly abashed. Dumbledore left the hall, walking quickly and quietly. Snape stood for a moment, *watching the headmaster with a expression of deep resentment on his face*; then he too left." Emphasis mine. I wonder if the "deep wound not healed" of Snape are not from Sirius and James, but from Dumbledore himself. Christelle From cmjohnstone at hotmail.com Fri Dec 10 15:03:04 2004 From: cmjohnstone at hotmail.com (littleleahstill) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 15:03:04 -0000 Subject: Sexuality as a theme in HP (long) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119632 Kethryn wrote: If you go with the sexual interpretation and say that Snape represents the darker side of sex (I think that's a bit too broad, I would narrow it down to say that he represents the darker side of desire that he has to fight), then Bella represents a dominatrix. And, like all good doms, she plays sub as well, sub to Voldemort for sure...maybe sub to Lestrange as well(although I tend to doubt that). Kethryn who has a calculus final in *EEEK* an hour. I will expand on this idea if there is interest. Leah now: Kethryn, really good luck with the calculus final. I think that seeing Bellatrix as a dominatrix per se, is perhaps trying to express the underlying sexual theme too particularly. I don't see JKR saying, 'and here's Grubbly-Plank, she can be a lesbian' for example. This is one of the reasons why I don't agree with the Lupin as paedophile suggestion. (I think the HIV analogy is much better, although I think that ties in win the prejudice/discrimination theme, not any sexual theme). However, there are many elements in the description of Bellatrix that do suggest a sort of SM perversion (I use the latter word deliberately in terms of Bellatrix, who is a deeply 'wrong' character). When we first see Bella, she is chained to the chair/throne- this is a powerful and beautiful woman in bondage. There are also references to Bella which could be snake references; her hooded eyes, her shining hair, and of course 'throne' itself in the UK at least has a toilet meaning. If snake references are also phallic references, then there we have a woman referred to in masculine terms. I wonder, if Sirius represents unbridled sexuality, in Olivier's idea, and Snape is repressed sexuality, whether Bellatrix represents sexuality which has been chained for a particular purpose. We know Bella comes from a family which is 'Toujours Pur' and that her sister was expelled from that family for making a mixed blood love match. There appears to be no affection whatsover between Bella and Lestrange- she has no interest in his welfare in the MOM, but it is a lovely pure blood marriage. Pure blood sexuality has been dammed along particular approved channels, rather than allowed to flow freely. Or perhaps I'm being too particular myself here, and Bellatrix is something deeper- a particular rejection of femaleness perhaps. She is named as the victor, and her name is also like Bellona, goddess of war, Belladonna (deadly nightshade). She is a rejection of the life giving qualities of femaleness, she gives death not life. I find all the various depictions of femaleness that suddenly crop up in OOTP quite odd, and I'd like to post more, but since I've rambled on enough here, I'll stop for now. Leah From Vivamus at TaprootTech.com Fri Dec 10 15:22:24 2004 From: Vivamus at TaprootTech.com (Vivamus) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 10:22:24 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Angry Harry in HBP? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200412101022238.SM01064@devbox> No: HPFGUIDX 119633 > imamommy: > > I would expect the boy to display the classic five steps of grief: > shock, denial, anger/bargaining, depression, and acceptance. > These are the five steps people go through when something > else traumatic happens to them. Each of these steps is > essential to mental health for the individual. Vivamus: It has been many years, so I could be mistaken, but as I recall, the five stages of the grief process, as outlined by (I think) Elizabeth Kubler-Ross, were Denial, Anger, Acceptance, Grief, and Resolution. The shock is part of the denial stage, I think: it does not seem real. Harry definitely is still in the denial stage about Sirius at the end of OOtP. The denial stage, for some people, goes on for years. In very rare cases it is only a few days, but those are generally when the deceased has been very ill for a long time, and they have emotionally prepared for the loss. Sirius was fine, then he was dead. Even when he was dead, it didn't seem like he was dead. It was just a doorway, right? He had just fallen through, and will come right back in a second or two. The shock in something like that is far greater because it is so sudden. I expect Harry's denial stage to go on through much of the next book. In real life, I would expect it to go on for a couple of years or more. The only reason I think it won't in this case, is because JKR will want to move the plot along, and there is only so much time you can spend with that (in a literary sense). The anger is the one to watch out for, though. In OOtP, Harry expressed a lot of anger at others for not including him in plans or telling him what was going on, and at DD for being manipulative. If Harry does go through the classic grief process, his anger in HBP will be directed at Sirius (for dying) or at God (or his representative DD) for allowing Sirius to die. He may also transfer that anger to Moody, his friends, Umbridge, Snape or anyone else he can blame instead of the person really responsible (himself). Guilt from the fact that he truly IS responsible for Sirius' death, compounded with all the anger we already have seen, will tend to make both the denial and the anger much worse. Depending on how far JKR wants to go down that road, I think we may see a Harry in HBP who is somewhat aloof and downright mean, for at least part of the time. Imamommy made a good point about him changing friends to some from the dark side, for a while. Depression is also generally a part of the anger phase, and some people bounce from denial into anger and depression, then back into denial, without ever accepting the loss. Acceptance is not so much a stage as a moment of transition, finally allowing one to grieve. There may come a time, for example, when Harry actually starts to write a letter to Sirius, then stops midway and starts bawling like a baby, soaking the parchment, as it finally sinks in that Sirius really is gone forever. This will also most likely be the first moment when he is able to accept comfort from others, and it finally opens the door for him to begin to find forgiveness of himself. The grief phase is generally represented by great sadness. He may actually be able to talk to Cho about Cedric, now that he *finally* understands, but I suspect Cho will have moved on from her own grief, and not really want to go there anymore. Luna will be more help to him in his grief. Probably Ginny will, too, partly because it is a convenient way to build their relationship, but also because she, like Molly, is a much more maternal type than any of the other female figures in his life. Molly's comfort will be too much like his lost mother's, I think, and therefore too painful, but Ginny will be there with him, and she was there when Sirius died. She can give him something of the love and forgiveness he will so desperately need in this time. I think Ron will continue to be clueless about what it means, because that's Ron. Neville will understand better than anyone, show both wisdom and strength we haven't seen yet, and be a solid rock for Harry. Hermione will go through her own grief process, but won't understand that it is necessarily different for Harry. I think Imamommy is also right about Harry not wanting to be around Hermione. Harry -- solid, dependable, always-there Harry -- will be a drifting wreck of sadness, and utterly useless for a time. (In fact, what about Harry disbanding the DA in despair, but they continue to meet and practice -- under Neville's leadership?) Real grief, when it finally hits some weeks or months after a death, doesn't last with intensity. In some ways, it lasts forever -- we always have some sadness when we think about the parts of ourselves that have gone through the veil -- but the sense of absolute loss is washed out pretty soon (hours or days, usually,) and we are left with a sense of empty sadness that reduces over time, but never goes entirely away. The resolution phase is the process of putting your life back together and going on. The most important thing to realize is that it cannot happen without going through the first four phases, and the first four phases are roughest if the death was sudden, if you actually were at least partly responsible, or if the one who died was particularly close to you. Those are all true for Harry with respect to Sirius, so IRL, at least, his grief journey would be monumentally difficult. I do expect JKR will collapse the process for literary reasons, as is her prerogative, but I wouldn't expect it to collapse all that much. I think JKR wants to go through the grief process with Harry, as he was so unwilling to do with Cho. The deepest question in this for me, is what will resolution look like for Harry? Will he be engraged at LV, or quietly determined? Will he finally lose his arrogance, burned away by the shame of Sirius' death, and see Snape as a necessary but unpleasant ally? Will he learn to laugh again by the end of HBP? Most of all, will he ever learn to forgive himself? Vivamus From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Fri Dec 10 15:34:42 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (Barry Arrowsmith) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 15:34:42 +0000 Subject: Guarding the Stone Message-ID: <02F380D1-4AC1-11D9-8177-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119634 This isn't a new subject, it's been pored over often enough in the past, but the recent thread discussing the Stone, immortality and Voldy - particularly the possibility that DD used the Stone as bait, encouraged me to drag it out from the back of the cupboard and give it a bit of a polish. Many fans have commented that the series of obstacles guarding the Stone are, to put it mildly, pretty pathetic. If three largely untrained children using just *one* simple spell can't be kept out, what chance of preventing Voldy from reaching the inner sanctum? None, is the answer. In fact once Fluffy goes bye-byes there's nothing that would present much of a problem to a trained wizard. Devil's Snare - first year Herbology gets them through. Flying keys - guess what? Broomsticks are provided - and what a coincidence! Enough for one each! Chess - there's no evidence that Ron is a chess prodigy - he's maybe above average for his age but little more than that. Troll - knocked out - just what they'd already done earlier in the book. Potions test - Yes, I know; a lot of wizards couldn't do it, Harry being one of them. But you'll also notice that it didn't stop Quirrell!Mort. Just what proportion of wizards constitutes 'a lot' anyway? Whatever it is, it still leaves a significant number who do have more than an ounce of logic, so all it would do would be to filter out the air-heads. It's not until we get through the kid's stuff that we hit the real security barrier - the Mirror. A real Dumbledore special. I've brooded on the Mirror before and for newer members and those who've successfully managed to erase my thoughts from their memories, a quick precis. It's a communication device like most mirrors in the WW, but it works in a slightly different way than many assume. Read the inscription - it's back to front - except for anyone *behind* the Mirror, i.e. someone sending to the Mirror so that the person in front sees the image that's transmitted. It shows what you desire - correct; it shows you, the person *on the other side* of the Mirror what you desire the person in front of the Mirror to see. Thus DD's observations that one would not know if what one saw was either real or possible. It shows what DD wants you to see and that may be something neither real nor possible. Quirrell and the Stone being a prime example. DD's explanation that only someone who wishes to *find* the Stone, not use it, would be able to get it, is more than a bit iffy - because that is exactly what Quirrell sees himself doing - finding it and then handing it to Voldy. Conversely what is Harry's 'desire' at that moment? To get the hell out of there, I should imagine. He certainly doesn't want the Stone, it's infinitely safer somewhere out of Voldy's reach. Yet the Mirror decides otherwise; it shows the Stone being slipped into Harry's pocket and - lo and behold! - it comes to pass. A slight digression - a timing anomaly; it's afternoon when the trio decide to lay their suspicions before DD, and McGonagall tells them that he left for the Ministry 10 minutes previously. It's many hours later that they go through the trapdoor - yet when DD is oozing concern over Harry he intimates that all those hours were taken up with getting to London and back. Yeah, sure. I don't believe it. I think DD was watching Quirrell and the Trio every step of the way. I think it was DD and not the Mirror that caused the Stone to be placed in Harry's pocket. And since DD is able to become invisible without the need for invisibility cloaks he may even have been physically present and it was he that slipped it into Harry's pocket. Off-hand I can't think of a safer place for the Stone than on DD's person, can you? Why would he put Harry in danger? you may ask. It's unlikely that Harry was in any real danger with DD lurking in the background. And there is a rationale of sorts: Harry has protection against Voldy, Voldy does not have protection against Harry. Voldy is foiled (yet again) and retires to Costa Adriatica to nurse his vaporous ego, this time for two years or so. And as DD says: "Nevertheless, Harry, while you may only have delayed his return to power [...] - and if he is delayed again, and again, why, he may never return to power." And a delay is what DD needs. Harry may well be the one to knock Voldy off his perch - but not when he's aged 11, he's not. Yet Voldy seems to be ready for his comeback, he's getting on his feet (or somebody else's, but it amounts to the same thing). He *has* to be knocked back, delayed until Harry gets more magic under his belt. The Stone stratagem will do it. It'll lure Voldy out and Harry's protection will make certain he's sent back to the state he was in after Godric's Hollow. You don't think that it was mere chance that the protections for the Stone could be circumvented by the Trio do you? Not likely! Not with Puppetmaster!DD in charge. Kneasy From drliss at comcast.net Fri Dec 10 15:35:32 2004 From: drliss at comcast.net (drliss at comcast.net) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 15:35:32 +0000 Subject: Lupin, Snape and Potions (was Re: Is Snape really THAT good in Message-ID: <121020041535.3433.41B9C2440001097300000D6922007637049C9C07049D0B@comcast.net> No: HPFGUIDX 119635 Finwitch: Hmm - Lupin has one problem in Potions he cannot overcome, practically displayed with two potion-problems: 1) Some potion ingredients must be gathered during Full Moon - I recall that Polyjuice required such. (and Lupin quite *obviously* cannot do that. Wolfsbane may be one of those Potions...!). 2) With some potions it takes a month to brew/prepare an ingredient (this will also include a Full Moon and thus disable any werewolf from brewing it without help). Other than that - so long as there's someone (like Sirius?) to do the things required done during Full Moon, he'll manage. But then, wouldn't it be simpler to just let that 'Full Moon - helper' do it for you? And there may also be that some of them require the use of silver instruments... So Lupin's not much of a Potion-brewer mainly because he's a werewolf. Lissa: I agree with the full-moon part, but my take on it was simply that Lupin just didn't have the type of mind one needs for Potions. Potions is very exact and meticulous and methodical. Lupin just may not have the mindset or aptitude for it: much like how a LOT of people hate math and chemistry and aren't good at it. I tend to think he isn't that great at potions, and his strengths lie elsewhere like in DADA and Care of Magical Creatures (given how much he works with critters in PoA). I think Snape IS truly brilliant at potions. Lupin omits a lot, but generally when he says something it has been shown to be the truth. Also, McGonagall appears to have a measure of respect for Snape (quite a bit, actually), and it sure ain't based on the personality we've seen! McGonagall despises incompetence, and I don't think she would treat Snape as her equal (which she does) if he was not in her mind. As for the silver instruments, that's purely fanon at this point. There's no evidence that Lupin- particularly in human form- can't touch silver. In fact, there's more insinuation that he can, given that he was drinking wine out of a goblet which could have been silver (there were silver goblets on the table anyway) in OotP. That's not to say Sirius didn't have a separate goblet that Lupin was using or there was a Flint going on there, but at any rate there's no canon evidence that silver burns Lupin. Liss [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From foxmoth at qnet.com Fri Dec 10 15:42:12 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 15:42:12 -0000 Subject: Sexuality as a theme in HP (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119636 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cat_kind" wrote: > > Pippin: Though Snape's occlumency lessons did not solve the ostensible problem of the dreams, they did solve the psychological problem which was posed at the beginning of the book--Harry's experience with Voldemort had left him with a taste for sadism, as shown by his attack on Dudley. By the end of the book this desire has been successfully repressed, and Harry is unable to perform the cruciatus curse. > > catkind: Harry's experience with Voldemort made him sadistic? Surely he has seen plenty of this bullying, taunting behaviour from Dudley himself, and assorted Slytherins, he doesn't need Voldemort to teach it to him. < Pippin: It is true that Harry has lashed out at Dudley and Draco before, but always before it was the other guy who initiated the bullying and Harry was fighting back. Rowling does not appear to think fighting back is wrong. Even the pure and innocent unicorn will react violently if it is attacked. (GoF ch 18) But in OOP, it is Harry who initiates the encounter. He has some good intentions. Dudley and his gang have been vandalizing playground equipment and beating up little kids; clearly they should be stopped. But mostly Harry is thinking "It would be really fun[...] to taunt him, watch him, with him powerless to respond[...]he'd love to vent some of his frustration on the boys who had once made his life hell--" -OOP ch 1. Harry talks himself out of attacking Dudley in front of his gang. The gang don't know enough about magic to be afraid of it and if Harry showed them, he'd be in trouble with the ministry. But he catches up with Dudley after the gang goes home, and then..."It gave Harry enormous satisfaction to know how furious he was making Dudley; he felt as if he was siphoning his own frustration onto his cousin, the only outlet he had." Harry continues to taunt Dudley, but Dudley finds a way to fight back. He taunts Harry about his dreams of Cedric. Harry is beyond furious..."Harry was pointing the wand directly at Dudley's heart. Harry could feel fourteen years' hatred of Dudley pounding in his veins -- what he wouldn't give to strike now, to jinx Dudley so thoroughly he'd have to crawl home like an insect, struck dumb, sprouting feelers--" Just my opinion, but I think that if Harry had still been able to summon against Bella the hatred and pleasure at the thought of seeing a helpless enemy suffer that he had felt earlier when confronting Dudley, then he would have been successful with the cruciatus curse. I too find it disturbing to think that Harry could or would sink to that level. But I also think that it is very much in keeping with Rowling's theme of choice. There is nothing essentialist in her book about being either a hero or a villain. Any of us can choose to be either. Pippin From foxmoth at qnet.com Fri Dec 10 16:07:55 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 16:07:55 -0000 Subject: Sexuality as a theme In-Reply-To: <5630362E-4A90-11D9-B2B4-000A95665DE8@m4x.org> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119637 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, olivier.fouquet+harry at m... wrote: > Many posters > >Does anyone agree that Lupin could represent paedophilia? > > I don't. As Siriusly Snapey Susan correctly remarked in her answer, this is Isabelle Smadja idea. I mentioned it for the sake of completeness.< > Pippin: I don't think Lupin represents paedophilia. I do think Rowling writes knowing that most children have been taught that they shouldn't accept sweets from strangers and that there are adults who might want to touch them in an inappropriate way. I think Lupin's actions deliberately allude to this in order to throw suspicion on him. In terms of PoA, they are red herrings. The chocolate is benign, and Lupin neither lusts for Harry nor is he possessed by Voldemort as a first time reader might fear. In terms of the septology, we don't know yet. I think Rowling is alluding to paedophilia, without making Lupin himself a paedophile, in order to remind the reader that people who show great sympathy and concern for children may still be capable of using them for their own ends. Rowling has named Lolita as one of her favorite books, calling it a "great and tragic love story" so the idea that one might present a paedophile as a sympathetic character is not foreign to her. http://www.quick-quote-quill.org/articles/2000/0500-heraldsun-te mpleton.html Pippin From foxmoth at qnet.com Fri Dec 10 16:30:13 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 16:30:13 -0000 Subject: Guarding the Stone In-Reply-To: <02F380D1-4AC1-11D9-8177-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119638 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Barry Arrowsmith wrote: > Conversely what is Harry's 'desire' at that moment? To get the hell out of there, I should imagine. He certainly doesn't want the Stone, it's infinitely safer somewhere out of Voldy's reach. Yet the Mirror decides otherwise; it shows the Stone being slipped into Harry's pocket and - lo and behold! - it comes to pass.< Pippin: Er, Kneasy, I don't think either of us have a high opinion of the narrator's general truthfulness, but he/she/it is generally sincere: *What I want more than anything else at the moment* , he thought, *is to find the Stone before Quirrell does.* -- PS/SS ch 17. I'm afraid Harry does want to find the Stone first. Harry does look frightened as he approaches the mirror, but it's only because he's afraid Quirrell won't believe him if he lies about what he sees. The spell is more logical than you give it credit for. Quirrell does have a use for the Stone. He wants to give it to Voldemort, and no doubt expects to be rewarded for it. Harry is not thinking of any reward, and so he succeeds. Kneasy:j > A slight digression - a timing anomaly; it's afternoon when the trio decide to lay their suspicions before DD, and McGonagall tells them that he left for the Ministry 10 minutes previously. It's many hours later that they go through the trapdoor - yet when DD is oozing concern over Harry he intimates that all those hours were taken up with getting to London and back. Yeah, sure. > > I don't believe it. I think DD was watching Quirrell and the Trio every step of the way. I think it was DD and not the Mirror that caused the Stone to be placed in Harry's pocket. And since DD is able to become invisible without the need for invisibility cloaks he may even have been physically present and it was he that slipped it into Harry's pocket. Off-hand I can't think of a safer place for the Stone than on DD's person, can you? > > Why would he put Harry in danger? you may ask. It's unlikely that Harry was in any real danger with DD lurking in the background.< Pippin: And who did Hermione and Ron meet in the entrance hall, if DD was lurking in the dungeons? TT!Dumbledore ? Polyjuiced!Snape? Metamorphed Tonks? The possibilities are endless! Pippin From jheiler at sympatico.ca Fri Dec 10 16:37:23 2004 From: jheiler at sympatico.ca (jeanico2000) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 16:37:23 -0000 Subject: Angry Harry in HBP? In-Reply-To: <200412101022238.SM01064@devbox> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119639 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Vivamus" wrote: imamommy: * snip * Guilt from the fact that he truly IS responsible for Sirius' death, compounded with all the anger we already have seen, will tend to make both the denial and the anger much worse. * snip * I disagree when anyone says that Harry is responsible for Sirius' death. All those who hid the truth from Harry are the ones responsible for Sirius' death. Yes, Harry is very impulsive, but he is above all a courageous, determined and heroic 15 year old. What he really needs, IMO, is guidance on how to better channel his emotions and I hope that he finds a caring person in book 6 who will help him work through his grief. As an adult, I find that there is much to admire in Harry. Nicole From cat_kind at yahoo.com Fri Dec 10 16:42:30 2004 From: cat_kind at yahoo.com (cat_kind) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 16:42:30 -0000 Subject: Sexuality as a theme In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119640 olivier.fouquet+harry at m... wrote: > > Many posters > > >Does anyone agree that Lupin could represent paedophilia? > > > > I don't. As Siriusly Snapey Susan correctly remarked in her > answer, this is Isabelle Smadja idea. I mentioned it for the sake > of completeness. catkind: well, nor do I, but if we follow Olivier's symbolism he sounds a bit suspicious: the patronus is supposed to symbolise something or other sexual (I forget if it was supposed to be masturbation or just ejaculation in general), and Lupin teaches Harry to cast it (nudge, nudge). And he gives Harry cups of tea - liquids! Ingested into the body! Snigger! catkind - in the spirit of pure mischief. Sorry Olivier, I'll reply to your more serious points over the weekend if I have time. From spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com Fri Dec 10 16:42:10 2004 From: spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com (dungrollin) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 16:42:10 -0000 Subject: Warlock/Wizard - was Asking JKR just one question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119641 Tonks wrote: > > Reading all of the post on warlock/wizard.. I am pulling out my > hair.. agh!!! I know that we are all Harry Potter fans here and > not students of real Witchcraft/ Wizardry... but if you pick up > any book on the subject it will tell you that: > > There are different categories of magic practitioners. The > sorcerer is the lowest and most likely to use dark magic. A > warlock and witch are the same thing.. different sex. A wizard is > a wise man or wise woman, and the very highest level. The term > Wizard is the same as a magus .. plural magi.. as in the Magi who > followed the star to the Christ child. > The problem is with how JKR is using the words, not with what is accepted use elsewhere. For example: "Harry - yer a wizard." - Hagrid, PS. "Harry - you're a great wizard, you know." - Hermione, PS. "And he [Harry] also happened to be a wizard." - PoA (page 1). > I'd say some folks..,, no names have fallen asleep in their > History of Magic class!!! Doesn't everyone? Tiddle pom, Dungrollin. From willsonkmom at msn.com Fri Dec 10 17:09:52 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 17:09:52 -0000 Subject: Humor and Sexuality (was : Sexuality as a theme) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119642 > catkind - in the spirit of pure mischief. Sorry Olivier, I'll reply to your more serious points over the weekend if I have time. Potioncat: I snipped Catkind's post but not because I didn't like it. The sexuality as a theme has a good deal of merit, whether or not it all fits, or whether or not JKR intended it. Oliver posted it in a Literature critique format...the type I have dim memories of from university days. (Those were the days, my friends...) A while back a thread followed the idea of sexual metaphor for the memory of Snape's problems with the broom and the laughing girl. It had never crossed my mind, and I appeared to be the only one naive enough not to think it. Being the mother of a teenaged boy, I am sure that at Hogwarts the innuendoes and jokes concerning brooms, wands and cauldrons would be too numerous to count. And more than likely the boys at least would be choking back laughter in any number of classes. Given the type of humor we see on this side of the pond in popular fiction, I'm very glad JKR didn't decide to have her characters engaging in these jokes. Star charts and Uranus were quite enough. Potioncat (not as prim as she just made herself sound, but very, very naive.) From Snarryfan at aol.com Fri Dec 10 17:09:55 2004 From: Snarryfan at aol.com (evita2fr) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 17:09:55 -0000 Subject: Jo's site and Snape's timeline in OOTP Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119643 JKR updated her site, the rumors section especially. She gave a hint about the way the Order use to communicate: "The Order communicates in a way that requires nothing but a wand. You saw the Order's method of communication in use even before you knew about the existence of the Order; it was employed by an Order member." I think she means this moment in GOF, when DD send a silvery thing to Hagrid, when Crouch Senior disappeared in the Forest. So, if this birdie thing is what Snape used in OOTP, it weights in why it takes so much time for Snape to warn Sirius and later DD and the Order about Harry. It's not a instant message thing, it takes time, more if the receiver is far away. Christelle From antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com Fri Dec 10 18:06:59 2004 From: antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com (antoshachekhonte) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 18:06:59 -0000 Subject: Sexuality as a theme in HP (long) (long Jungian take) In-Reply-To: <002b01c4deb0$3f13f760$0402a8c0@carolina.rr.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119644 > > Alla: > > In light of "cruciatus attempt" I guess I have a question - what > > about Bella? What does she represent if we go with this > > interpretation? > > Kethryn now - > If you go with the sexual interpretation and say that Snape represents the > darker side of sex (I think that's a bit too broad, I would narrow it down > to say that he represents the darker side of desire that he has to fight), > then Bella represents a dominatrix. And, like all good doms, she plays sub > as well, sub to Voldemort for sure...maybe sub to Lestrange as well > (although I tend to doubt that). > > Kethryn who has a calculus final in *EEEK* an hour. I will expand on this > idea if there is interest. Like you, I've got too much to say on this subject to actually pull together in a post. >.< On the general subject: I think it is interesting and illuminating to look at the sexual themes in the books. Some of them are--well, explicit isn't exactly the right word, but STATED. Sexual attraction--at age-appropriate levels--is part of the books from CoS (Ginny's crush) on. These are coming-of-age books, and any coming-of-age books that don't acknowledge the romantic/sexual feelings of the adolescent characters is going to be much less interesting than the HP series is. (CS Lewis's kids stop coming to Narnia once the opposite sex starts looking interesting.... Just a thought.) I think some of the implicit symbolism is very much of interest as well. A Freudian analysis of the books is very revealing. What's the driving force, say, of CoS? Once again, Ginny's crush. What power does this crush unleash? A huge, deadly snake that the object of Ginny's affection must tame in order for her to survive. Go, Sigmund. Having said that, I'd rather take a more Jungian view: that the books--like all good stories--are myth-making, that they are rites of passage for the characters, and for the readers. The journey that Harry is undertaking is clearly one towards integration. For him to be a whole person at the end of the story--whether he survives on-page or not--he needs to recognize and accept all of the deep, repressed STUFF in his own self, what Jung called the Subconscious. This stuff gets projected out onto the people around him. There's all of the negative impulses that Harry, being a Good Person, tries to shove down--this is what Jung calls the Shadow. He recognizes these urges in the people around him-- particularly Dudley, Malfoy, Voldemort and of course Snape. He wouldn't hate these people if they didn't represent something he can't stand in himself. There's the negative self- image down in the shadow as well--the idea propounded by the Dursleys that Harry is clumsy, stupid and worthless. This has been projected onto Neville, whom Harry is constantly trying to redeem, even though he's exasperated by his friend. But look what's happening to Neville! He's suddenly blooming into the kind of hero that Harry himself would like to be. I think Harry's realization of his father's imperfections--his father having been, to that point, an idealized hero figure--is, in a way, a step towards beginning to integrate his own negative side into his personality. Then, of course, there's the image of the opposite sex, what Jung called (in males) the Anima. This is the accumulation of all of the parts of you that you perceive as being inappropriate in your own gender. There are two aspects of this--positive and negative. Now, Harry has one ideal woman: his mom. She is the image of what Harry believes the female should be--loving, loyal, fiercely protective. Look at the women Harry cares about in the series--Molly Weasley, Ginny, Hermione. All share Lily's traits to a certain extent. I think Harry is initially attracted to Cho because he thinks that's who she is. Well, she's a perfectly lovely young woman, but she doesn't exactly turn out to match Harry's ideal, and they both end up disappointed in each other. Luna stands outside the ideal in some ways as well. And yet I am curious to see where JKR takes Harry's relationship with her. There is also, of course, the negative ideal, the Wicked Stepmother, if you will. In Harry's case, this is represented by Petunia and Umbridge, but I think, as Harry matures, it will be represented more by Bellatrix, who represents the negative side of everything his mother stood for. She is hateful, spiteful, and cruel. For a mid-adolescent boy, this is no longer merely a Bad Mom, this is Bad Woman, and so, yes, she has a powerful negative sexual edge to her, like the slinky villainesses in so many film noir classics. I think her dom-ness is just part of what makes Harry so compelled to despise her. You know, I'm sort of looking forward to her trying to go after Neville. Whew. Long answer for a short punchline. Anyway, it seems to me that the books will have to conclude with Harry coming to grips not only with his own heroic nature--which is very real--but with his darker nature as well, in terms of his own natural urges for both sex and power. Antosha, who should really stop reading Jungian stuff. From ohneill_2001 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 10 18:18:57 2004 From: ohneill_2001 at yahoo.com (ohneill_2001) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 18:18:57 -0000 Subject: SHIP: Ron & Hermione (was Re: Hermione's Patronus) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119645 Dawn wrote: > I read that in an online chat that JKR stated that she's given us all > plenty of hints about the Ron/Hermione thing. We all know how that's > going to turn out. Now Cory: Umm...no offense, but we're all familiar with the "plenty of hints" quote that you're referring to, and that's not *quite* how it ended. She said she's given us plenty of hints to allow us to figure out whom is going to end up with whom, not that she's given us plenty of hints about R/H. Given JKR's tendancy to give obscure clues and put odd twists in her stories, you can read that quote as supporting almost any SHIP imaginable. --Cory, who is not really interested in a shipping debate, but wanted to clear up what seemed like a pretty blatant inaccuracy. From imamommy at sbcglobal.net Fri Dec 10 18:20:51 2004 From: imamommy at sbcglobal.net (imamommy at sbcglobal.net) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 18:20:51 -0000 Subject: Angry Harry in HBP? In-Reply-To: <200412101022238.SM01064@devbox> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119646 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Vivamus" wrote: > > imamommy: > > > > I would expect the boy to display the classic five steps of grief: > > shock, denial, anger/bargaining, depression, and acceptance. > > These are the five steps people go through when something > > else traumatic happens to them. Each of these steps is > > essential to mental health for the individual. > > Vivamus: > It has been many years, so I could be mistaken, but as I recall, the five > stages of the grief process, as outlined by (I think) Elizabeth Kubler-Ross, > were Denial, Anger, Acceptance, Grief, and Resolution. snip > > Sirius was fine, then he was dead. Even when he was dead, it didn't seem > like he was dead. It was just a doorway, right? He had just fallen > through, and will come right back in a second or two. The shock in > something like that is far greater because it is so sudden. imamommy: Well, I actually was referring to his reaction to the prophecy, and those are the way the steps are laid out when somebody finds out that they are dying. So poor Harry has two new major things to work on: The Prophecy, *and* Sirius' death. And he may have to confront his feelings more on Cedric; remember, he kept pushing that issue away. Harry is going to be going through at least two grief processes, although I am sure they will be compounded to make him completely miserable for a while. snip If Harry does go through > the classic grief process, his anger in HBP will be directed at Sirius (for > dying) or at God (or his representative DD) for allowing Sirius to die. He > may also transfer that anger to Moody, his friends, Umbridge, Snape or > anyone else he can blame instead of the person really responsible (himself). > Guilt from the fact that he truly IS responsible for Sirius' death, > compounded with all the anger we already have seen, will tend to make both > the denial and the anger much worse. imamommy: I disagree that Harry is responsible for Sirius' death, at least not completely. Harry made a bad choice, DD made a bad choice, Sirius made one, Voldemort made a whole bunch, and Bella made some, too. What Harry needs to accept is that sometimes, death just happens. It doesn't always make a lot of sense, there's not always a clear person to blame. JKR said Sirius' death will make more sense to us in future books; perhaps it will make more sense to Harry as well. (I still haven't figured out the full importance of this choice.) snip Depending on how far JKR wants to go > down that road, I think we may see a Harry in HBP who is somewhat aloof and > downright mean, for at least part of the time. Imamommy made a good point > about him changing friends to some from the dark side, for a while. > Depression is also generally a part of the anger phase, and some people > bounce from denial into anger and depression, then back into denial, without > ever accepting the loss. > imamommy: I didn't necessarily mean "the dark side" as in Future Death Eaters of the UK. I suggested Nott because he is a Slytherin, not necessarily "good" but also not yet proven to be "evil," ie in league with Voldemort. Also, if as some suspect he is the "stringy Slytherin boy" in Hagrid's class who can see thestrals, he may have some insight for Harry. Yes, his father's a DE, but we know that Teddy himself doesn't necessarily follow the crowd. Perhaps Harry will attempt to learn Dark Arts to fight Voldemort, perhaps he'll just join Winky in drinking too many butterbeers;P I think for a while he's going to give up on a lot of stuff, until somthing catalyzes him out of his self-pity. snip I think Imamommy is also right about > Harry not wanting to be around Hermione. Harry -- solid, dependable, > always-there Harry -- will be a drifting wreck of sadness, and utterly > useless for a time. > snip > I do expect JKR will collapse the process for literary reasons, as is her > prerogative, but I wouldn't expect it to collapse all that much. I think > JKR wants to go through the grief process with Harry, as he was so unwilling > to do with Cho. > > The deepest question in this for me, is what will resolution look like for > Harry? Will he be engraged at LV, or quietly determined? Will he finally > lose his arrogance, burned away by the shame of Sirius' death, and see Snape > as a necessary but unpleasant ally? Will he learn to laugh again by the end > of HBP? Most of all, will he ever learn to forgive himself? > > Vivamus imamommy: I hope she does indeed take us throught the grief process with him. Death is such a major theme in these books, I would feel ripped of if she didn't. But I also hope that Harry can find the source of healing and peace that he needs, probably through some sort of spiritual experience. He needs to accept that death happens to all of us at one time or another, and tremember that "to the well- organized mind, death is but the next great adventure." imamommy From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 10 18:32:02 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 18:32:02 -0000 Subject: The silver hand (Was: The Darkness Within) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119647 Finwitch wrote: > I'd say that - since the line reads as 'Flesh of the servant, willingly given' - you'll notice that - while it had to be his whole right hand to demonstrate his status as the servant (right hand man), and his *willingness* (gives his right hand for) as well as PP not being under Imperius, and cutting off his hand with a knife - the line *only* includes flesh. > > I'd say that the flesh in the had became part of the potion restoring > Voldemort, and that the rest of the hand bones, nerves, blood, skin > and nails - did not. They stayed in the cauldron. Still, I suppose > only the MASTER could return the hand, else it would make the part > about willingness invalid. > > It may have been silvery, due to the fact it was still under a spell > of replacing flesh - but yes, I think it stays. Carol responds: I like the interpretation in your first paragraph, particularly the "right-hand man" idea, though, of course, it *is* just interpretation and I'm not sure that the knife demonstrates that Pettigrew is not under Imperius. (It does, however, make the whole operation more grisly and perhaps satisfies Voldemort's sadistic appetite for pain.) But I don't think that the hand is Pettigrew's muscle, bones, and sinews with a silvery covering. It's clearly solid silver, as its power to crush demonstrates. (I can find the quote to show what I'm talking about if it's needed.) It's a weapon in its own right, setting aside the property of silver to kill werewolves, and it does seem like an appropriate reward for Wormtail's "willing" sacrifice, one that Voldemort no doubt hopes Wormtail will use in his service (as Macnair uses his axe). My question is still where the silver came from and how a conjured hand can remain in place without violating the rules of JKR's magical universe. There has to be some reason why the hand differs from leprechaun gold. Maybe the hand is *transfigured* rather than conjured, with the flesh having already done its work in restoring Voldemort before the whole hand is changed to silver, summoned, and magically attached to Peter's arm. If that's the case, the question of where the silver comes from may be no more relevant than the question of where the feet, teeth, eyws, etc. come from when a pincushion is transformed into a hedgehog (or how the hedgehog can become a living creature, or a hat or piece of parchment a sentient being). Still, though, if any object or body part can be turned to solid silver, why couldn't a poor witch or wizard (other than Lupin ;-) ) turn a china plate to silver (or gold) and sell it for some galleons to buy food? Maybe I'm just trying to apply logic to a nonrational universe? Or maybe, like MacGonagall bending the rules to allow Harry to become a Seeker for Gryffindor, JKR can bend the rules of her universe if the plot requires it? (Another example is Lupin not turning into a werewolf until the full moon comes out from behind the cloud. If he only needs to stay out of the moonlight, why take the wolfbane potion? Why not just stay indoors?) Carol, hoping that the silver hand question doesn't get lost in a discussion of her parenthesis on Lupin From imamommy at sbcglobal.net Fri Dec 10 18:35:32 2004 From: imamommy at sbcglobal.net (imamommy at sbcglobal.net) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 18:35:32 -0000 Subject: Mrs. Figg and Crookshanks Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119648 JKR posted on her site: "Arabella Figg does a roaring trade in cross-bred cats and kneazles..." So, did she breed Crookshanks? imamommy From Vivamus at TaprootTech.com Fri Dec 10 18:41:15 2004 From: Vivamus at TaprootTech.com (Vivamus) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 13:41:15 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Angry Harry in HBP? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200412101341905.SM01064@devbox> No: HPFGUIDX 119649 > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Vivamus" wrote: > imamommy: > * snip * > Guilt from the fact that he truly IS responsible for Sirius' > death, compounded with all the anger we already have seen, > will tend to make both the denial and the anger much worse. > * snip * > > I disagree when anyone says that Harry is responsible for Sirius' > death. All those who hid the truth from Harry are the ones > responsible for Sirius' death. Yes, Harry is very impulsive, > but he is above all a courageous, determined and heroic 15 > year old. What he really needs, IMO, is guidance on how to > better channel his emotions and I hope that he finds a caring > person in book 6 who will help him work through his grief. > As an adult, I find that there is much to admire in Harry. > Nicole Vivamus: Nicole, I quite agree that he needs guidance on what to do with his emotions, and I also agree that he is not the only one -- nor even the main one -- responsible for Sirius' death (I lay that at the feet of Bellatrix). But in talking about the grief, I was trying to look at it from his emotional point of view, as it were. Sirius is dead because Harry (1) didn't listen to any of his friends about it being impossible for Sirius to be at the MoM, (2) didn't listen to DD, Sirius, or Lupin about Occlumency, (3) didn't trust Snape enough to work with him on Occlumency, (4) forgot that Snape was in the OOtP, and probably a few other reasons. Granted, Harry's emotions were overwhelming. Had he used his head in any ONE of those areas instead of galloping madly off in all directions, however, Sirius would not have died. As adults, we can look at that and be very understanding about it -- but it would still cause us a level of pain almost beyond imagination. When you have messed up and someone is dead as a direct result of your mistakes, that is a truly devastating burden. Look at it from Harry's point of view: His Godfather, the only adult (in Harry's mind) who is anything like a father to Harry, is now dead because Harry didn't listen to ANYONE. That would be tough for anyone of any age to handle, and Harry is, as you said, only 15. Vivamus From siskiou at vcem.com Fri Dec 10 18:42:29 2004 From: siskiou at vcem.com (Susanne) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 10:42:29 -0800 Subject: New wand info on JKR's website Message-ID: <628225998.20041210104229@vcem.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119650 So, Hermione's wand is made of vine wood with a dragon heartstring core. And even though in the book Ron's wand (the new one) is said to be made of willow, she says it's ash wood on her website. She also wrote this: Harry, Ron and Hermione unite the three Ollivander wand cores (other wandmakers may use different substances, as shown by Fleurs wand, but Ollivander is widely acknowledged to be the best maker). Significant? -- Best regards, Susanne mailto:siskiou at vcem.com From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 10 18:54:46 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 18:54:46 -0000 Subject: Sirius' Death & animagus transformations In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119651 Jen wrote: why does it take such complexity for a wizard to learn how to transform into an animal, but an animal brain can make the required calculations to turn back into a human? Is it some issue of cellular matter, where your original form is easier to transform back into? > > It seems like in animal form the wizard is still choosing whether to > transform back to human or not. Sirius and Remus had to force Peter > to transform and Sirius could sense when he should stay an animal at > Azkaban. Carol responds: I answered a similar question way back when but don't have time to locate the post and, to be honest, don't remember exactly what I said. However, on the simplest level, I think that the animagus, though he has an animal's senses and reactions, also retains his own identity. James, Sirius, and Peter remembered who they were as they ran around in the moonlight with werewolf Lupin (who may have acquired some sense of *his* identity by being with them, though his fight with Padfoot in PoA seems to undermine this idea). MacGonagall certainly knows exactly who she is as she waits on the wall for Dumbledore (though the comic detail of the cat reading the map seems a bit far-fetched and is clearly intended for a juvenile audience). Later, she transforms into a cat and back again in her classroom, clearly not losing her identity or sense of purpose, though she might have been distracted slightly had Scabbers been in the room. (Would she have recognized him as a fellow animagus, I wonder?) And Scabbers himself clearly plans his escape by faking his own death just as Peter did earlier and hides in Hagrid's hut, knowing that he won't show up on the Marauder's Map. (Whether he also knows that Crookshanks is part kneazel and suspects him of being an animagus or only fears that Crookshanks intends to eat him, I'm not sure, but his actions suggest fear that Sirius is about to catch him and expose him. The loss of weight and hair after he hears that Sirius has escaped from Azkaban suggests a similar conclusion. So, as I see it, an animagus has animal instincts and abilities, can think like an animal as needed (Sirius can eat rats and escape from some of his human depresssion in dog form), but he or she retains a knowledge of his or her human identity and the ability to change back at need. No doubt that step is the hardest part of becoming an animagus and the reason why it's both rare and regulated. If some wizards can't apparate without being splinched, it stands to reason that others could be trapped in animal form with no way to transfigure themselves back into humans. If no one who can do the spell to retransfigure them knows who they really are, they could be stuck in animal form forever. (And of course, animagi can use their abilities for evil purposes, which is another reason the ability is regulated. That, too, would require a knowledge of their human identity.) Carol From Gregory.Lynn at gmail.com Fri Dec 10 19:04:49 2004 From: Gregory.Lynn at gmail.com (Gregory Lynn) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 14:04:49 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] New wand info on JKR's website In-Reply-To: <628225998.20041210104229@vcem.com> References: <628225998.20041210104229@vcem.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119652 On Fri, 10 Dec 2004 10:42:29 -0800, Susanne wrote: > > She [Rowling] also wrote this: > Harry, Ron and Hermione unite the three Ollivander wand cores > (other wandmakers may use different substances, as shown by Fleur's wand, > but Ollivander is widely acknowledged to be the best maker). > > Significant? > > -- > Best regards, > Susanne mailto:siskiou at vcem.com With all the story elements dealing with strength in unity and weakness in division, it would almost have to be significant wouldn't it? That, of course, brings to mind two other times when they have all used their wands on the same thing at the same time. They did it once on the train, accompanied by Fred & George against Malfoy, Crabbe, and Goyle. And they did it against Snape in the Shrieking Shack scene. Perhaps they will all have to act at once against Voldemort in the final confrontation. -- Gregory Lynn From siskiou at vcem.com Fri Dec 10 19:13:36 2004 From: siskiou at vcem.com (Susanne) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 11:13:36 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] New wand info on JKR's website In-Reply-To: References: <628225998.20041210104229@vcem.com> Message-ID: <1625018670.20041210111336@vcem.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119653 Hi, Friday, December 10, 2004, 11:04:49 AM, Gregory wrote: > Perhaps they will all have to act at once against Voldemort in the > final confrontation. I hope so, since I've never liked the "Harry will be alone in his final confrontation with Voldemort" theory. But first Ron will have to get a new wand, since his current one is still willow... -- Best regards, Susanne mailto:siskiou at vcem.com From shrtbusryder2002 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 10 19:50:00 2004 From: shrtbusryder2002 at yahoo.com (Jason) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 19:50:00 -0000 Subject: Dudders and the Dementors Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119654 I know ever since OOP there has been a lot of speculation as to whether or not he was a squib and whether or not he could see the dementors. I havent been keeping up with JKRs site but I know a lot of updates have been made very recently and reading the stuff about squibs was interesting. They cant see Dementors. So whether or not Dudley could see them has no bearing on his magical parentage. He could be a squib even though he hasnt seen them. Jason From elsyee_h at yahoo.com Fri Dec 10 20:09:22 2004 From: elsyee_h at yahoo.com (Tammy) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 20:09:22 -0000 Subject: Guarding the Stone In-Reply-To: <02F380D1-4AC1-11D9-8177-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119655 >Kneasy wrote: *snipping sadly the beautiful beginnings* > I don't believe it. I think DD was watching Quirrell and the Trio every > step of the way. I think it was DD and not the Mirror that caused the > Stone to be placed in Harry's pocket. And since DD is able to become > invisible without the need for invisibility cloaks he may even have > been physically present and it was he that slipped it into Harry's > pocket. Off-hand I can't think of a safer place for the Stone than on > DD's person, can you? > > Why would he put Harry in danger? you may ask. It's unlikely that Harry > was in any real danger with DD lurking in the background. And there is > a rationale of sorts: Harry has protection against Voldy, Voldy does > not have protection against Harry. Voldy is foiled (yet again) and > retires to Costa Adriatica to nurse his vaporous ego, this time for two > years or so. And as DD says: > > "Nevertheless, Harry, while you may only have delayed his return to > power [...] - and if he is delayed again, and again, why, he may never > return to power." > > *snips the remainder* Tammy replies: First of all, you get standing ovation for a beautiful theory. I truly love this group for all the beautiful theories you guys think up. I merely have one issue (other than the one pippin brought up about Hermione and Ron meeting Dumbledore in the entry hall).... As Voldemort is a very powerful wizard even while he's in someone else's body, shouldn't he have realized that Dumbledore is present? True, Dumbledore could be more powerful in that he could fully cover his presence, but I still can't help but feel that Voldemort would be able to sense Dumbledore in the room. -Tammy From mysticowl at gmail.com Fri Dec 10 20:10:00 2004 From: mysticowl at gmail.com (Alina) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 15:10:00 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Guarding the Stone In-Reply-To: <02F380D1-4AC1-11D9-8177-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com> References: <02F380D1-4AC1-11D9-8177-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119656 > Potions test - Yes, I know; a lot of wizards couldn't do it, Harry > being one of them. But you'll also notice that it didn't stop > Quirrell!Mort. Just what proportion of wizards constitutes 'a lot' > anyway? Whatever it is, it still leaves a significant number who do > have more than an ounce of logic, so all it would do would be to filter > out the air-heads. I have always assumed that Voldemort figured out the potions puzzle because he was muggle-raised, so he learned to think like a muggle before learning to think like a wizard. So Hermione's comment about how most wizards don't have the kind of logic it takes is still valid to me. Alina. From gbannister10 at aol.com Fri Dec 10 20:28:59 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 20:28:59 -0000 Subject: Dudders and the Dementors In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119657 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jason" wrote: Jason: > I havent been keeping up with JKRs site but I know a lot of updates > have been made very recently and reading the stuff about squibs was > interesting. They cant see Dementors. Geoff: JKR seems to have contradicted herself here. In her website, as Jason points out, she says that Squibs can only sense Dementors, not see them. However, in OOTP, we have.... '"Incidentally, can Squibs see Dementors?" he (Fudge) added, looking left and right along the bench. "Yes, we can!" said Mrs.Figg indignantly.' (OOTP "The Hearing" p.131 UK edition) If JKR's information on the website is accurate, why should Mrs.Figg lie? From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 10 20:31:40 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 20:31:40 -0000 Subject: Jo's site and Snape's timeline in OOTP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119658 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "evita2fr" wrote: > > > JKR updated her site, the rumors section especially. She gave a hint > about the way the Order use to communicate: > > "The Order communicates in a way that requires nothing but a wand. > You saw the Order's method of communication in use even before you > knew about the existence of the Order; it was employed by an Order > member." > > I think she means this moment in GOF, when DD send a silvery thing to > Hagrid, when Crouch Senior disappeared in the Forest. > > So, if this birdie thing is what Snape used in OOTP, it weights in > why it takes so much time for Snape to warn Sirius and later DD and > the Order about Harry. > > It's not a instant message thing, it takes time, more if the receiver > is far away. Carol notes: More than the Rumours. There's great new information on Squibs and Wands in the Extra Stuff section, some new FAQs, and a new FAQ poll. (Please, everyone, vote for the Neville question!) Carol, disappointed to find that Mrs. Figg did not see the Dementors and probably will not be the person to perform magic at an advanced age, but happily confirmed in her views on the significance of yew vs. holly for the "brother wands" and the idea, which I once presented in a post, that HRH's wands contain, respectively, Phoenix feather, unicorn hair, and dragon's heart string, one for each of Ollivander's "powerful magical substances" From doddiemoemoe at yahoo.com Fri Dec 10 20:39:07 2004 From: doddiemoemoe at yahoo.com (doddiemoemoe) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 20:39:07 -0000 Subject: Sexuality as a theme In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119660 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, > olivier.fouquet+harry at m... wrote: > > > Many posters > > >Does anyone agree that Lupin could represent paedophilia? > > > > I don't. As Siriusly Snapey Susan correctly remarked in her > answer, this is Isabelle Smadja idea. I mentioned it for the sake > of completeness.< > > > > Pippin: > I don't think Lupin represents paedophilia. I do think Rowling > writes knowing that most children have been taught that they > shouldn't accept sweets from strangers and that there are adults > who might want to touch them in an inappropriate way. I think > Lupin's actions deliberately allude to this in order to throw > suspicion on him. >> I think Rowling is alluding to paedophilia, without making Lupin > himself a paedophile, in order to remind the reader that people > who show great sympathy and concern for children may still be > capable of using them for their own ends. > > Rowling has named Lolita as one of her favorite books, calling it > a "great and tragic love story" so the idea that one might present > a paedophile as a sympathetic character is not foreign to her. > > Pippin Doddiemoe here: In regard to the paedophilia tangent, I do not believe that Lupin is a representative of a pedophile. Would not Fake Moody/Crouch Jr. fit the mold more? Fake Moody gave treats--the book to Neville, gave tips/help to Harry with the Tri-wizard tasks. Fake Moody does lust after Harry to win the Tri-Wizard tornament if Harry wins then Fake Moody/Crouch Jr. will be rewarded with power and the "love"(adoration/respect) of Voldemort. Fake Moody also fits the mold of many pedophiles..He was a victim of DE's/Voldemort at a young age and now is setting up Harry to become another victim. (the cycle of victims who sometimes end up becoming abusers) Then there was the comment by Lavender/Parvarti about, "that eye shouldn't be allowed". While Lupin does give sweets, he does it for a reason. We also see him restraining himself from clapping Harry on the shoulder; not to mention the fact that he takes the M.Map from Harry and consistently gives Harry the advice HARRY needs. Lupin's goal is to keep Harry safe in appropriate ways. Does this make any sense? Doddiemoe From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 10 20:39:58 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 20:39:58 -0000 Subject: website SPOILERS . Who goes to Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119661 I did not see anybody commenting on this piece of info on JKR website yet. Apologies if I missed it. I am glad that JKR confirmed my suspicion that there are no MORE magical or LESS magical children as far as admission to Hogwarts goes. Everybody is guaranteed place there. FAO section on the site. "Do all young people in Britain's Wizarding World go to Hogwarts? For example, did Stan Shunpike attend Hogwarts? Or is Hogwarts a school just for those who are particularly good at magic while others go into trades without formal schooling? [Mugglenet/Lexicon question] Everyone who shows magical ability before their eleventh birthday will automatically gain a place at Hogwarts; there is no question of not being `magical enough'; you are either magical or you are not. There is no obligation to take up the place, however; a family might >not want their child to attend Hogwarts." From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 10 20:42:37 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 20:42:37 -0000 Subject: Theo Nott (Was: Angry Harry in HBP?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119662 imamommy wrote: > > I didn't necessarily mean "the dark side" as in Future Death Eaters > of the UK. I suggested Nott because he is a Slytherin, not > necessarily "good" but also not yet proven to be "evil," ie in > league with Voldemort. Also, if as some suspect he is the "stringy > Slytherin boy" in Hagrid's class who can see thestrals, he may have > some insight for Harry. Yes, his father's a DE, but we know that > Teddy himself doesn't necessarily follow the crowd. > Perhaps Harry will attempt to learn Dark Arts to fight Voldemort, > perhaps he'll just join Winky in drinking too many butterbeers;P I > think for a while he's going to give up on a lot of stuff, until > somthing catalyzes him out of his self-pity. Carol Notes: Theo *is* the "stringy Slytherin boy" who saw Thestrals. JKR has just confirmed this speculation on her website in, IIRC, The FAQ section. (Hooray! I was right on that one, too. Sorry. Still haven't quite gotten over Mark Evans.) Carol, who hopes that Theo will provide interesting insights into the mental and emotional struggeles faced by intelligent Slytherins who don't mindlessly follow the party line From elsyee_h at yahoo.com Fri Dec 10 20:43:54 2004 From: elsyee_h at yahoo.com (Tammy) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 20:43:54 -0000 Subject: Dudders and the Dementors In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119663 > Jason: > > I havent been keeping up with JKRs site but I know a lot of > updates > > have been made very recently and reading the stuff about squibs was > > interesting. They cant see Dementors. > > Geoff: > JKR seems to have contradicted herself here. In her website, as Jason > points out, she says that Squibs can only sense Dementors, not see > them. > > However, in OOTP, we have.... > > '"Incidentally, can Squibs see Dementors?" he (Fudge) added, looking > left and right along the bench. > "Yes, we can!" said Mrs.Figg indignantly.' > > (OOTP "The Hearing" p.131 UK edition) > > If JKR's information on the website is accurate, why should Mrs.Figg > lie? Tammy replies: Mrs. Figg lied to give more credibility to Harry's story. Dumbledore obviously expected a some sort of trumped up charges against Harry, so he had Mrs. Figg testify that she did see the Dementors so she could backup Harry's story. Dumbledore also, no doubt, knew that no one in the counsel would have known that Squibs can't see Dementors... very clever that Dumbledore :P -Tammy From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Fri Dec 10 20:50:29 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 20:50:29 -0000 Subject: Guarding the Stone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119664 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > > Er, Kneasy, I don't think either of us have a high opinion of the > narrator's general truthfulness, but he/she/it is generally > sincere: > > *What I want more than anything else at the moment* , he > thought, *is to find the Stone before Quirrell does.* -- PS/SS ch > 17. > > I'm afraid Harry does want to find the Stone first. Kneasy: Poetic license - me or JKR - take your pick. Though personally, a Harry bound hand and foot hoping to find the Stone.... Why would he want to anyway? Does Harry think that finding out where it's hidden would mean that Quirrell wouldn't be able to? Strange ideas that lad has. > > Pippin: > And who did Hermione and Ron meet in the entrance hall, if DD > was lurking in the dungeons? TT!Dumbledore ? > Polyjuiced!Snape? Metamorphed Tonks? The possibilities are > endless! > > Kneasy: Tsk, tsk. Mocking poor old Kneasy. Shame on you. DD's actual presence was, as I said, a possibility only, ("he may"). Be fun if he was, but even a dyed-in-the-wool compulsive theorist like me has to recognise that it's odds against. Pity. But I'll stand firm in believing that he was lurking somewhere in the vicinity. More timing questions. Hermione says that it "took a while" to bring Ron round, then they had to retrace their steps, then on down to the Entrance Hall. No instant response, all over in two ticks sequence. It hinges on how long 'a while' is. Me, I think it's maybe just long enough to give support to my suspicions. (Motto: when there's elbow room, use it; where there's doubt, exploit it.) DD already knows what's happened when they meet him. "Harry's gone after him, hasn't he?" What a fascinating question! The sort of question that might (might? Ha!) make one suspect that DD already knows who 'he' is? Ooh! The possibilities that could spring from that. (Mind into overdrive, steam seeps from ears. Nurse! The ice packs! Quickly!) And how did he know that? More importantly - When did he know that? Care to make a guess? From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Fri Dec 10 21:14:02 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 21:14:02 -0000 Subject: Guarding the Stone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119665 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tammy" wrote: > > I merely have one issue (other than the one pippin brought up about > Hermione and Ron meeting Dumbledore in the entry hall).... As > Voldemort is a very powerful wizard even while he's in someone else's > body, shouldn't he have realized that Dumbledore is present? True, > Dumbledore could be more powerful in that he could fully cover his > presence, but I still can't help but feel that Voldemort would be able > to sense Dumbledore in the room. > Without distractions, then he probably could, though it's worth remembering that he doesn't sense Frank Bryce listening at the door at the beginning of GoF - Nagini tells him; chances either way, I think. (This is mostly theoretical, you understand; I've already responded to Pippin admitting that it's not really likely that he was present.... though it's such a seductive idea it's difficult to discard.) But anyway, distractions there were. Plus he's stuffed inside a turban. He's after the Stone. Where is it? Nothing there except this Mirror thingy that shows the Stone but not where it is. Puzzle, ponder, think. Then that unmitigated pest Potter turns up. Really! The chances of a seriously evil villain having 5 minutes peace and quiet are absolutely shocking. What I'd really like to know.... DD arrives in time to pull Quirrell off Harry. Harry remembers this - the voice, Quirrell's arms being wrenched from his grasp. Was Voldy still there? Oh, and ignore film contamination, please. Kneasy From elsyee_h at yahoo.com Fri Dec 10 21:52:20 2004 From: elsyee_h at yahoo.com (Tammy) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 21:52:20 -0000 Subject: Guarding the Stone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119666 > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tammy" wrote: > > > > I merely have one issue (other than the one pippin brought up about > > Hermione and Ron meeting Dumbledore in the entry hall).... As > > Voldemort is a very powerful wizard even while he's in someone else's > > body, shouldn't he have realized that Dumbledore is present? True, > > Dumbledore could be more powerful in that he could fully cover his > > presence, but I still can't help but feel that Voldemort would be able > > to sense Dumbledore in the room. > > > > Without distractions, then he probably could, though it's worth > remembering that he doesn't sense Frank Bryce listening at the door > at the beginning of GoF - Nagini tells him; chances either way, I think. > (This is mostly theoretical, you understand; I've already responded to > Pippin admitting that it's not really likely that he was present.... though > it's such a seductive idea it's difficult to discard.) > > But anyway, distractions there were. Plus he's stuffed inside a turban. > He's after the Stone. Where is it? Nothing there except this Mirror thingy > that shows the Stone but not where it is. Puzzle, ponder, think. > Then that unmitigated pest Potter turns up. Really! The chances of a > seriously evil villain having 5 minutes peace and quiet are absolutely > shocking. Tammy replies: Poor guy, true enough, I'd forgotten about old Frank. And if Voldemort can be distracted enough at his own home (in a manner of speaking) to not notice a muggle immediately, then he could definitely be distracted enough to not notice a powerful wizard like Dumbledore. I agree, there are problems with the theory, but I too like the idea. Then again, I like anything that displays Dumbledore as something other than the kindly old guy he is (recently got into a heated argument with someone because I merely pointed out that at the very least some of Dumbledore's actions can be taken as manipulative). > Kneasy wrote: > What I'd really like to know.... > DD arrives in time to pull Quirrell off Harry. > Harry remembers this - the voice, Quirrell's arms being wrenched from > his grasp. > Was Voldy still there? > Oh, and ignore film contamination, please. > Tammy replies: I would say that Voldemort probably left when Quirrell was in so much pain right around the time that the pain in Harry's scar made him pass out. Whatever else that scar is, it does seem to be an indicator of Voldemort's emotions, and that blinding pain that made Harry pass out was probably going through Voldemort, with Voldemort's only option being to leave Quirrell's body. Of course that doesn't preclude the idea the Dumbledore arrived and did something to Quirrell/Voldemort to make Voldemort leave Quirrell. What I want to know is this: If Voldemort hadn't left before Quirrell died, would Voldemort have died as well (too lazy to look up if that's been discussed before :P ) -Tammy From elsyee_h at yahoo.com Fri Dec 10 21:58:33 2004 From: elsyee_h at yahoo.com (Tammy) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 21:58:33 -0000 Subject: Guarding the Stone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119667 > > > > Pippin: > > And who did Hermione and Ron meet in the entrance hall, if DD > > was lurking in the dungeons? TT!Dumbledore ? > > Polyjuiced!Snape? Metamorphed Tonks? The possibilities are > > endless! > > > > > > Kneasy: > Tsk, tsk. > Mocking poor old Kneasy. Shame on you. > DD's actual presence was, as I said, a possibility only, ("he may"). > Be fun if he was, but even a dyed-in-the-wool compulsive > theorist like me has to recognise that it's odds against. Pity. > But I'll stand firm in believing that he was lurking somewhere in > the vicinity. > > More timing questions. > Hermione says that it "took a while" to bring Ron round, then they > had to retrace their steps, then on down to the Entrance Hall. No > instant response, all over in two ticks sequence. It hinges on how > long 'a while' is. Me, I think it's maybe just long enough to give > support to my suspicions. > (Motto: when there's elbow room, use it; where there's doubt, > exploit it.) > > DD already knows what's happened when they meet him. > "Harry's gone after him, hasn't he?" > What a fascinating question! > The sort of question that might (might? Ha!) make one suspect > that DD already knows who 'he' is? Ooh! The possibilities that > could spring from that. (Mind into overdrive, steam seeps from > ears. Nurse! The ice packs! Quickly!) > > And how did he know that? > More importantly - When did he know that? > Care to make a guess? Tammy replies: Oh, that one is easy to answer - Snape told him of course :P My theory is that Snape told Dumbledore from the beginning all about his suspicions. That would explain why Dumbledore showed up at the second Quidditch match, 'cause Dumbledore told him everything right after it happened. Beyond that, Dumbledore can probably see whatever anyone sees in the mirror (hence why he knew Harry had been going there), so he knew that Quirrell had stood in front of the mirror, and that the mirror had given Harry the stone and it was time for him (Dumbledore) to return to Hogwarts from whatever hiding place he had chosen (forest maybe?) -Tammy From tzakis1225 at netzero.com Fri Dec 10 22:05:40 2004 From: tzakis1225 at netzero.com (demetra1225) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 22:05:40 -0000 Subject: Angry Harry in HBP? In-Reply-To: <200412101022238.SM01064@devbox> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119668 > > imamommy: > > > > I would expect the boy to display the classic five steps of grief: > > shock, denial, anger/bargaining, depression, and acceptance. > > These are the five steps people go through when something > > else traumatic happens to them. Each of these steps is > > essential to mental health for the individual. > > Vivamus: > It has been many years, so I could be mistaken, but as I recall, the five stages of the grief process, as outlined by (I think) Elizabeth Kubler-Ross, were Denial, Anger, Acceptance, Grief, and Resolution. [snip] Demetra: Actually, iammommy was closer. The five stages are: Denial (this isn't happening to me), Anger (I hate that this happening to me), Bargaining (I promise I'll be a better person if...), Depression (I don't care anymore), Acceptance (I'm ready for whatever comes) If I recall my university years, Kubler-Ross was specifically referring to the stages one goes through when coming to terms with a diagnosis of a terminal illness. When applying them to the grief over the loss of a loved one, I'm not sure that each stage applies. How would bargaining would apply in Harry's case. He can't very well say "I'll never ignore Hermione's warnings again if you just bring Sirius back from the dead" I'm sure I'm in the minority, but I don't think we'll see a Harry who is stuck in denial or anger in HBP. I think that Harry's interaction with Luna at the end of OotP, where she talks about her things being taken etc., was to usher him into the stage of acceptance. Vivamus again: > The deepest question in this for me, is what will resolution look like for Harry? Will he be engraged at LV, or quietly determined? Will he finally lose his arrogance, burned away by the shame of Sirius' death, and see Snape as a necessary but unpleasant ally? Will he learn to laugh again by the end of HBP? Most of all, will he ever learn to forgive himself? Demetra: I think he will be more quietly determined. I think he will be a little less likely to react rashly and run off half-cocked. I also think we will see more of a melding of Harry's Gryffindor traits and Harry's inner Slytherin - more cunning, a little sneaky, more subtle and less predictable. Demetra From gbannister10 at aol.com Fri Dec 10 23:07:54 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 23:07:54 -0000 Subject: Dudders and the Dementors In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119669 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tammy" wrote: Tammy: > > Mrs. Figg lied to give more credibility to Harry's story. Dumbledore > obviously expected a some sort of trumped up charges against Harry, so > he had Mrs. Figg testify that she did see the Dementors so she could > backup Harry's story. Dumbledore also, no doubt, knew that no one in > the counsel would have known that Squibs can't see Dementors... very > clever that Dumbledore :P Geoff: I'm inclined to take the opposite view; I think if that was the case, Dumbledore was making a very dangerous assumption. Amelia Bones is a legal eagle and strikes me as a pretty smart cookie. And I would imagine that Dumbledore, as the erstwhile Chief Warlock of the Wizengamot, knows her capabilities . From gbannister10 at aol.com Fri Dec 10 23:22:09 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 23:22:09 -0000 Subject: Angry Harry in HBP? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119670 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "demetra1225" wrote: Vivamus: > > The deepest question in this for me, is what will resolution look > like for Harry? Will he be engraged at LV, or quietly determined? > Will he finally lose his arrogance, burned away by the shame of > Sirius' death, and see Snape as a necessary but unpleasant ally? > Will he learn to laugh again by the end of HBP? Geoff: I think he already has begun to.... In message 118643, I was following up a thread which I had actually started at message 118574 "Harry's developing behaviour - average or unique?" and I wrote the following which I think is relevant to your comment..... "Harry nodded. He somehow could not find words to tell them what it meant to him to see them all ranged there, on his side. Instead, he smiled, raised a hand in farewell, turned around and led the way out of the station towards the sunlit street with Uncle Vernon, Aunt Petunia and Dudley hurrying along in his wake." (OOTP "The Second War Begins" p.766 UK edition) That smile, for me, is almost like the sun beginning to try to break through the heavy storm clouds after rain on the hills above my home; things are beginning to clear, there is hope that brightness is coming. Geoff http://www.aspectsofexmoor.com Exmoor National Park views, walks and West Somerset Railway steam and diesel views From steve at hp-lexicon.org Fri Dec 10 23:34:03 2004 From: steve at hp-lexicon.org (hp_lexicon) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 23:34:03 -0000 Subject: website SPOILERS . Who goes to Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119671 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > > I did not see anybody commenting on this piece of info on JKR website > yet. What I immediately noticed is that she only half-way answered the question. So did Stan Shunpike go to Hogwarts? How common is it for people NOT to go? All this tells us is that the invitation goes out. What percentage of people say yes? If almost everyone says yes, then the total number of school age Wizarding children in Britain is frightfully small -- at most a thousand, as per Jo's comment. That's the size of a small high school in the United States, and most communities have a number of such high schools. If, on the other hand, most families turn down the position in favor of having the kids go into a trade, then the Wizarding World is a bit more reasonable size. I should have rephrased the question...and I spent a month writing those questions, hoping to avoid this sort of thing! Steve The Lexicon From moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 10 23:40:40 2004 From: moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com (K G) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 15:40:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Dudders and the Dementors In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041210234040.85288.qmail@web53505.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119672 Tammy: > > Mrs. Figg lied to give more credibility to Harry's story. Dumbledore > obviously expected a some sort of trumped up charges against Harry, so > he had Mrs. Figg testify that she did see the Dementors so she could > backup Harry's story. Dumbledore also, no doubt, knew that no one in > the counsel would have known that Squibs can't see Dementors... very > clever that Dumbledore :P Geoff: I'm inclined to take the opposite view; I think if that was the case, Dumbledore was making a very dangerous assumption. Amelia Bones is a legal eagle and strikes me as a pretty smart cookie. And I would imagine that Dumbledore, as the erstwhile Chief Warlock of the Wizengamot, knows her capabilities . On the web site, JKR says that she *did not* see the dementors but not that she *could not*. IIRC, Harry heard her turning the corner and running down the alley way *after* the dementors left. It always struck me as strange her showing up at the hearing and testifying as she did since they were gone *before* she got there. I do not have my books here with me (I am working at my second job right now and only have a stack of letters in front of me), but if someone has a better memory than I do, or their books close by, could you please correct me if I am incorrect? moonmyyst --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 10 23:55:05 2004 From: moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com (K G) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 15:55:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Angry Harry in HBP? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041210235505.23860.qmail@web53506.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119673 Geoff Bannister wrote: Geoff: I think he already has begun to.... In message 118643, I was following up a thread which I had actually started at message 118574 "Harry's developing behaviour - average or unique?" and I wrote the following which I think is relevant to your comment..... "Harry nodded. He somehow could not find words to tell them what it meant to him to see them all ranged there, on his side. Instead, he smiled, raised a hand in farewell, turned around and led the way out of the station towards the sunlit street with Uncle Vernon, Aunt Petunia and Dudley hurrying along in his wake." (OOTP "The Second War Begins" p.766 UK edition) That smile, for me, is almost like the sun beginning to try to break through the heavy storm clouds after rain on the hills above my home; things are beginning to clear, there is hope that brightness is coming. Geoff That scene touched me deeply. I saw this as several things. I saw Harry grow up a good bit in that moment. I also saw him steel himself to what had happened. He finally came to understand that he was not alone like he thought throughout OotP. I also saw him coming to grips with the Dursleys and his past. Instead of trailing after them, he lead the way and they were trailing after him. I have always held that OotP was a very uncomfortable book. That is probably why it is my favorite. That is a very uncomfortable age under the best of circumstances. (I have raised 2 kids through that age and have one left to go.) I think that we are going to see a more determined, more focused, more adult Harry in the next 2 books. moonmyyst __________________________________________________ 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 mgrantwich at yahoo.com Fri Dec 10 23:57:37 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 15:57:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Dudders and the Dementors In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041210235737.18449.qmail@web53102.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119674 --- Geoff Bannister wrote: > JKR seems to have contradicted herself here. In her website, as > Jason > points out, she says that Squibs can only sense Dementors, not see > them. > > However, in OOTP, we have.... > > '"Incidentally, can Squibs see Dementors?" he (Fudge) added, > looking > left and right along the bench. > "Yes, we can!" said Mrs.Figg indignantly.' > > (OOTP "The Hearing" p.131 UK edition) > > If JKR's information on the website is accurate, why should > Mrs.Figg lie? Because she's doing her best to save Harry's bacon. Harry even thinks she's describing them not as someone who actually saw them but rather as someone who had had them described TO her. Probably Dumbledore coached her. It's only when she describes the effect it had on her that the Wizan-whatchamacallit believes her. I took it as a given that she was lying about seeing them. Magda __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat Dec 11 00:22:03 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 00:22:03 -0000 Subject: website SPOILERS . Who goes to Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119675 Steve: What I immediately noticed is that she only half-way answered the question. So did Stan Shunpike go to Hogwarts? How common is it for people NOT to go? All this tells us is that the invitation goes out. What percentage of people say yes? If almost everyone says yes, then the total number of school age Wizarding children in Britain is frightfully small -- at most a thousand, as per Jo's comment. That's the size of a small high school in the United States, and most communities have a number of such high schools. If, on the other hand, most families turn down the position in favor of having the kids go into a trade, then the Wizarding World is a bit more reasonable size. I should have rephrased the question...and I spent a month writing those questions, hoping to avoid this sort of thing! Alla: Yes, you are right, but I got the answer to the question I was interested the most in light of the discussions we had earlier - how easy it is to get admitted to Hogwarts, how elitistic the admission system is, etc. I am also glad that as long as magical child shows spark of magic he/she considered to be a wizard. That means, IMO, that Neville did not show ANY magic, none whatsoever during the times his family was worried about him. As to how many children really go to Hogwarts, well she did say it is up to the family to decide. I guess I want to know that answer too, but I am at least happy to learn about the fact that being magical is the only acceptance test Hogwarts has. From dfrankiswork at netscape.net Sat Dec 11 00:26:02 2004 From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (davewitley) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 00:26:02 -0000 Subject: Hermione's age Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119676 is now confirmed by JKR's website as being a few months older than Harry's. Cat, pigeons. David From siskiou at vcem.com Sat Dec 11 00:53:32 2004 From: siskiou at vcem.com (Susanne) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 16:53:32 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Hermione's age In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <198797467.20041210165332@vcem.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119677 Hi, Friday, December 10, 2004, 4:26:02 PM, davewitley wrote: > is now confirmed by JKR's website as being a few months older than > Harry's. Yes, she is close to a year older, and I am glad to see this! ;) I clung stubbornly to this opinion, even after JKR confirmed the dvd timeline, which would have made Hermione a year younger. But seeing JKR and her relationship with math, I always thought there was a good possibility she didn't realize the implication. -- Best regards, Susanne mailto:siskiou at vcem.com From imontero at iname.com Fri Dec 10 18:35:49 2004 From: imontero at iname.com (lunamk03) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 18:35:49 -0000 Subject: SHIP: Ron & Hermione (was Re: Hermione's Patronus) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119678 Dawn wrote: > > I read that in an online chat that JKR stated that she's given us > all > > plenty of hints about the Ron/Hermione thing. We all know how > that's > > going to turn out. Now Cory: > Umm...no offense, but we're all familiar with the "plenty of hints" > quote that you're referring to, and that's not *quite* how it ended. > She said she's given us plenty of hints to allow us to figure out > whom is going to end up with whom, not that she's given us plenty of > hints about R/H. Given JKR's tendancy to give obscure clues and put > odd twists in her stories, you can read that quote as supporting > almost any SHIP imaginable. > > --Cory, who is not really interested in a shipping debate, but wanted > to clear up what seemed like a pretty blatant inaccuracy. Luna: Hi Cory! Actually, if we limit ourselves to the books, you are right, you can find clues for any ship you can think of. But if we follow JKR answers to questions in the shippy side, you'll realize that she is following a pattern: H/H are very platonic friends, but she won't answer for someone else... And look at these answers: Dateline NBC June 20, 2003 Couric: "Any snogging with Hermione?" Rowling: (slight frown) "Hermione and Harry! Do you think so?" Couric: "No I'm kidding. Rowling: "Ron and Hermione, I would say, have more potential (or did she say "tension") there" (A/N: I know this is a crucial sentence, but I had some trouble understanding her here? she mumbles the sentence a little. This is my best interpretation! Either way, R/H shippers around the world are grinning!) Barnes and Noble Chat 20 October 2000 Q: Is it just me, or was something going on between Ron and Hermione during the last half of Goblet of Fire? I love your books, by the way, and two of them I've read straight through cover to cover in under 24 hours. JKR: Well done on the reading speed! Yes, something's "going on," but Ron doesn't realize it yet. Typical boy. Well, I don't think she is lying to hide the "real ship" for the simple reason that the shippy side of the books is not that important. It is not such a big mystery. When JKR wants to be shippy, she is overly so ;-))... From lea_petra at myway.com Sat Dec 11 00:13:35 2004 From: lea_petra at myway.com (mari) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 19:13:35 -0500 (EST) Subject: Dudders and the Dementors Message-ID: <20041211001335.9FDB2394D@mprdmxin.myway.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119679 Tammy: >> Mrs. Figg lied to give more credibility to Harry's story. Dumbledore obviously expected some sort of trumped up charges against Harry, so he had Mrs. Figg testify that she did see the Dementors so she could backup Harry's story. Dumbledore also, no doubt, knew that no one in the counsel would have known that Squibs can't see Dementors... very clever that Dumbledore :P << Geoff: > I'm inclined to take the opposite view; I think if that was the case, Dumbledore was making a very dangerous assumption. Amelia Bones is a legal eagle and strikes me as a pretty smart cookie. And I would imagine that Dumbledore, as the erstwhile Chief Warlock of the Wizengamot, knows her capabilities . < Mari: I think Mrs. Figg lied on her own. She didn't see them, but she did feel them. She had to have recognized them some how, otherwise how did she know what attacked Harry and Dudley? Did her cats see the Dementors and report back to her? If that was the case that may explain why all the squibs we have met are very attached to their cats. From rsteph1981 at yahoo.com Sat Dec 11 01:43:30 2004 From: rsteph1981 at yahoo.com (Rebecca Stephens) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 17:43:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Hermione's age In-Reply-To: <198797467.20041210165332@vcem.com> Message-ID: <20041211014330.63560.qmail@web20023.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119680 --- Susanne wrote: > > > > Hi, > > Friday, December 10, 2004, 4:26:02 PM, davewitley > wrote: > > > is now confirmed by JKR's website as being a few > months older than > > Harry's. > > Yes, she is close to a year older, and I am glad to > see > this! ;) > > I clung stubbornly to this opinion, even after JKR > confirmed the dvd > timeline, which would have made Hermione a year > younger. You can add my sister and myself to those who also clung to the Hermione-as-oldest belief. I don't really care (from a character or story point of view), but I really wanted to go with what I thought was the most logical cut-off date. ===== http://wychlaran.tripod.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Send holiday email and support a worthy cause. Do good. http://celebrity.mail.yahoo.com From javalorum at yahoo.ca Fri Dec 10 21:25:19 2004 From: javalorum at yahoo.ca (javalorum) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 21:25:19 -0000 Subject: Angry Harry in HBP? In-Reply-To: <200412101022238.SM01064@devbox> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119681 Vivamus: > I do expect JKR will collapse the process for literary reasons, as is her > prerogative, but I wouldn't expect it to collapse all that much. I think > JKR wants to go through the grief process with Harry, as he was so unwilling > to do with Cho. > > The deepest question in this for me, is what will resolution look like for > Harry? Will he be engraged at LV, or quietly determined? Will he finally > lose his arrogance, burned away by the shame of Sirius' death, and see Snape > as a necessary but unpleasant ally? Will he learn to laugh again by the end > of HBP? Most of all, will he ever learn to forgive himself? Again, I'm new to this group so i don't know if this has been mentioned before. Harry being angry and arrogant is really my general disappointment with ootp. I'm sure a lot of people have pointed out Harry went from a quiet, mature, and happy boy and turned into a whiny angry punk. I liked SS (and the movie version too) because Harry was seeing things with positive, excited quietness which represented his strength and maturity. And I thought that was believeable and admirable even for a 11 year old. But in ootp, he is just completely self-involved. With the exception of Gump, every plotline has a direct link to him. I know it is his book, but it's just like all the characters got nothing better to do than discussing about him, concerning over him, and creating trouble for him. Even the part about Ron being Prefect and getting the cup is for HIM to get jealous and angry over. He gets annoyed with everyone including his best friends, and hates pretty much everything. What I mean is, I liked the boy because he was a positive character, he overcame all that difficulty and still loved life and believed in goodness. But there's almost nothing positive in ootp, it turned out Harry doesn't like his friends as much as we thought he did, Harry's Dad's generation wasn't really bonded by friendship (did anyone else think the way Siruis and James treated Wormtail was almost like how Sirius treated Kreacher?), Dumbledore's not as wise or as considerate as we thought he was. It's dark book in both plots and spirits. And I think, because of this attitude change, Harry had more self- involved thoughts (is it me or this book is a lot more descriptive on Harry's inner thoughts than any other?) and most of the time, he use anger as a way out. Well, when you're that arrogant, of course you'd think the whole world is against you. It's probably normal for teenagers, but for someone so determined like Harry to suddenly change like that is indeed a shock. Sometimes I wish this was just the author's angle, to show a teenager's growth and self-awareness. But other times, it just seems like it's reflecting the author's own state of mind. The whole thing about media franzy, and frustration over politics are very adult oriented. Maybe I'm just too old, but do 15-year old actually worry about the power struggle between ministry and school? I've graduated from school and started working already, and still just kinda getting to know the whole office politics and power struggle thing. Hermione must be extremely smart and wise to figure that out all by herself at the tender age of 15. Thanks for your attention! Java From javalorum at yahoo.ca Fri Dec 10 21:45:14 2004 From: javalorum at yahoo.ca (javalorum) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 21:45:14 -0000 Subject: Muggle technology for communication? (Re: Jo's site) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119682 Christelle wrote: > JKR updated her site, the rumors section especially. She gave a > hint about the way the Order use to communicate: > > "The Order communicates in a way that requires nothing but a wand. > You saw the Order's method of communication in use even before you > knew about the existence of the Order; it was employed by an Order > member." > > I think she means this moment in GOF, when DD send a silvery thing > to Hagrid, when Crouch Senior disappeared in the Forest. > > So, if this birdie thing is what Snape used in OOTP, it weights in > why it takes so much time for Snape to warn Sirius and later DD and > the Order about Harry. Just curious, at time of great difficulty and war, is it possible for wizards to use muggle technology? I mean, considering the other side may not expect the usage of cellphones and such, it's not likely they'll try to monitor it (it's hard to track the content of a call if it's well ciphered anyway). Wizards do use some form of technology (seems it was just splited from muggle development at one point in history -- with the exception of wrist watches, hey, come to think of it, how come Arthur Weasley was so excited to get a screwdriver set from Harry? Their watches or furnitures are bonded together by magic I guess?), and there seem to be no law banning such act, only frowned upon. It'll be cool to see these kids using text messaging on cell phones. :D Java From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Fri Dec 10 22:29:52 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 14:29:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Website Update SPOILER Message-ID: <20041210222952.94564.qmail@web53102.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119683 I guess I was the last person to notice JKRs site update, actually I went there this morning and only the extra stuff section was updated. So I just went there and amongst the many interesting things I found is this Rumor: "Harry stand trial again in HP&THBP" JKR: This theory has been put foward to explain why Harry does not spend as long in Priver Drive during this book as the previous ones, but I am happy to say that he leaves the Dursleys early for a much pleasanter reason than a court case" This means Harry by June or July will be happy, right? Hell overcome his grief over losing Sirius and hes just happy to get to the Burrow or to 12GP (or wherever the HQ is). But my guess (and wishes) are that Sirius will be back, I think its the only thing that could make Harry happy just a few weeks after his godfather *died*, or LV is dead (just dreaming here, we still have 2 books to go). Juli, whos very grateful to JKR for the update, its nice to have new things to thing about. P.S Theodore Nott is the "stringy" Slytherin that saw the thestral!!! __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat Dec 11 02:10:24 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 02:10:24 -0000 Subject: Website Update SPOILER In-Reply-To: <20041210222952.94564.qmail@web53102.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119684 Juli: "Harry stand trial again in HP&THBP" JKR: This theory has been put foward to explain why Harry does not spend as long in Priver Drive during this book as the previous ones, but I am happy to say that he leaves the Dursleys early for a much pleasanter reason than a court case" This means Harry by June or July will be happy, right? He?ll overcome his grief over losing Sirius and he?s just happy to get to the Burrow or to 12GP (or wherever the HQ is). But my guess (and wishes) are that Sirius will be back, I think it?s the only thing that could make Harry happy just a few weeks after his godfather *died*, or LV is dead (just dreaming here, >we still have 2 books to go). Alla: Hi,Juli! I was intrigued by this bit of info too. Unfortunately, I have to disagree with you (kind of) I don't think that Harry will overcome his grief THAT early in the book, when school haven't even started yet. Or, if he would, it will be extremely dissapointing FOR ME. I speculate that specific event occur, which will be pleasant for Harry, not the rapid change in his feelings. I don't know - somebody's birthday party. As to Sirius' return - you probably know that I REALLY want this one to happen, but I have the same objection - way too early in the book. Somebody said that IF Sirius will return, it has to happen when Harry is completely (or at least majorly) came to terms with his death, otherwise it makes little sense plotwise. I agree completely. I will be happy to be wrong on this one though. :o) From elsyee_h at yahoo.com Sat Dec 11 03:29:54 2004 From: elsyee_h at yahoo.com (Tammy) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 03:29:54 -0000 Subject: Dudders and the Dementors In-Reply-To: <20041210234040.85288.qmail@web53505.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119685 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, K G wrote: > > > > > Tammy: > > > > Mrs. Figg lied to give more credibility to Harry's story. Dumbledore > > obviously expected a some sort of trumped up charges against Harry, > so > > he had Mrs. Figg testify that she did see the Dementors so she could > > backup Harry's story. Dumbledore also, no doubt, knew that no one in > > the counsel would have known that Squibs can't see Dementors... very > > clever that Dumbledore :P > > Geoff: > I'm inclined to take the opposite view; I think if that was the case, > Dumbledore was making a very dangerous assumption. > > Amelia Bones is a legal eagle and strikes me as a pretty smart > cookie. And I would imagine that Dumbledore, as the erstwhile Chief > Warlock of the Wizengamot, knows her capabilities . > > > > > > > moonmyyst: > On the web site, JKR says that she *did not* see the dementors but not that she *could not*. IIRC, Harry heard her turning the corner and running down the alley way *after* the dementors left. It always struck me as strange her showing up at the hearing and testifying as she did since they were gone *before* she got there. I do not have my books here with me (I am working at my second job right now and only have a stack of letters in front of me), but if someone has a better memory than I do, or their books close by, could you please correct me if I am incorrect? > > > Tammy replies: Good catch, indeed it's true that the dementors "dissolved into a silver mist" before Mrs. Figg makes her entrance. Harry even takes a moment to contemplate before Mrs. Figg comes running in. I still think Mrs. Figg lied though, if only from her behaviour at the hearing. Plus, could she really have seen the whole thing happen? If she did, why did she stay away, why not come up and give Harry at least moral support? -Tammy From elsyee_h at yahoo.com Sat Dec 11 03:38:16 2004 From: elsyee_h at yahoo.com (Tammy) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 03:38:16 -0000 Subject: Squibs and Cats(was: Re: Dudders and the Dementors) In-Reply-To: <20041211001335.9FDB2394D@mprdmxin.myway.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119686 > > > Mari: > I think Mrs. Figg lied on her own. She didn't see them, but she did feel them. She had to have recognized them some how, otherwise how did she know what attacked Harry and Dudley? > Did her cats see the Dementors and report back to her? If that was the case that may explain why all the squibs we have met are very attached to their cats. Tammy: She also mentioned something about Mrs. Figg breeding cats and Kneazles, maybe to cope with not being magical, Squibs use the half-breed cats... which would make not only Crookshanks half kneazle, but Mrs. Norris as well? They are very intelligent, and as I recall, detect suspicious people (or some such thing, I'm far away from my FB book)... maybe that would include Dementors, which is why she sent Mr. Tibbles after Harry. -Tammy From imamommy at sbcglobal.net Sat Dec 11 03:39:55 2004 From: imamommy at sbcglobal.net (imamommy at sbcglobal.net) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 03:39:55 -0000 Subject: Angry Harry in HBP? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119687 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "demetra1225" wrote: > > > > imamommy: > > > > > > I would expect the boy to display the classic five steps of grief: > > > shock, denial, anger/bargaining, depression, and acceptance. > > > These are the five steps people go through when something > > > else traumatic happens to them. Each of these steps is > > > essential to mental health for the individual. > > > > Vivamus: > > It has been many years, so I could be mistaken, but as I recall, > the five stages of the grief process, as outlined by (I think) > Elizabeth Kubler-Ross, were Denial, Anger, Acceptance, Grief, and > Resolution. [snip] > > Demetra: > Actually, iammommy was closer. The five stages are: Denial (this > isn't happening to me), Anger (I hate that this happening to me), > Bargaining (I promise I'll be a better person if...), Depression (I > don't care anymore), Acceptance (I'm ready for whatever comes) > > If I recall my university years, Kubler-Ross was specifically > referring to the stages one goes through when coming to terms with a > diagnosis of a terminal illness. When applying them to the grief > over the loss of a loved one, I'm not sure that each stage applies. > How would bargaining would apply in Harry's case. He can't very well > say "I'll never ignore Hermione's warnings again if you just bring > Sirius back from the dead" Snip > Demetra imamommy: I was referring to Harry's learning about the prophecy, which is in a way like being diagnosed with a terminal illness. He now knows (or thinks he knows) that either he has to kill Voldemort, or Voldemort will kill him, so he is facing either spiritual death (becoming a killer) or physical death, or both. Perhaps he will try bargaining by an (short-lived, I'm sure) attempt at giving up magic? imamommy From madettebeau at gmail.com Sat Dec 11 03:51:22 2004 From: madettebeau at gmail.com (madlysarcastic) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 03:51:22 -0000 Subject: Angry Harry in OotP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119688 Java wrote: > Again, I'm new to this group so i don't know if this has been > mentioned before. Maddy writes: I believe it has been mentioned before...but regardless, we all might as well have our say, haven't we? ;) Java wrote: > And I think, because of this attitude change, Harry had more self- > involved thoughts (is it me or this book is a lot more descriptive > on > Harry's inner thoughts than any other?) and most of the time, he use > anger as a way out. Well, when you're that arrogant, of course you'd > think the whole world is against you. It's probably normal for > teenagers, but for someone so determined like Harry to suddenly > change like that is indeed a shock. Maddy: I agree that there's definitely more of an inner monologue going on OotP. That might account for the shock some people felt. In fact, I don't think I really had a very good understanding of Harry's character until I read OotP. He seemed rather unremarkable before that book. It was the first time in which I didn't agree with everything Harry said or did. Before that he was too much of an "everyman". With my teenage years not being too long ago, I can safely say that it is typical to be fairly melodramatic and self-absorbed. I think part of it, though, is that Harry is *tired* of having to cooperate and be a good boy. Nobody's treating him like an adult, so why should be mature like an adult? Arrogant? Yeah, but everybody is to some extent. But the boy does have to be given some extra credit; he has done a lot more than the average 15-year-old and probably is entitled to be a little more arrogant than most his age. Java wrote: > I'm sure a lot of people have pointed out > Harry went from a quiet, mature, and happy boy and turned into a > whiny angry punk. I liked SS (and the movie version too) because > Harry was seeing things with positive, excited quietness which > represented his strength and maturity. And I thought that was > believeable and admirable even for a 11 year old. But in ootp, he is > just completely self-involved. (snipped a bit) > He gets annoyed with everyone including > his best friends, and hates pretty much everything. What I mean is, > I > liked the boy because he was a positive character, he overcame all > that difficulty and still loved life and believed in goodness. Maddy here: Upon first read of OotP, I was a little flustered by Harry's behaviour and extreme emotions, too. But it's making more sense the more I think about it. Harry's grown up in a not-so-nice-to-him home, and yes, despite that he generally knows right from wrong and becomes a happy kid once he's at Hogwarts. But there are so many traumatic things that happen to him between the first book and the fifth. -Through the Mirror of the Erised and the photo album Hagrid made him, he gets to see his parents - the family he never had. Although this is a small part in PS/SS, I think it has profoundly affected Harry since then. He's told that his parents are wonderful people who loved him. He now has some appreciation of what he lost; what Voldemort denied him. While we don't see much anger from Harry in this first book, I think he's only beginning to understand how affected he is by this loss. -He meets Voldemort face to face and defeats him (for the time being). No small feat for an eleven-year-old. -In CoS he gets the first taste of being talked about viciously by others, experiences anger, shame, confusion (he didn't know why he could speak parseltongue, thought he could be the heir of Slytherin, etc), but pulls through it all, and when it comes down to it he's able to out-smart Riddle, kill a Basilisk and save Ginny Weasley. -In PoA, we see the first signs of real rage. He felt very vengeful towards Sirius before he knew the truth; he was almost ready to kill Sirius. Once the truth is told, Harry quickly switches his hatred for sincere affection for Sirius; this shows how quickly Harry's emotions can change. -In GoF Harry and Ron's fight shows that Harry can be quite stubborn, and vicious when he chooses to be. His encounter with Voldy, Wormtail and the DEs is very traumatic: Cedric dying, being cut to have his blood used in a potion to convert the scary!scale-y!baby!Voldy to full-fledge Vodly, Dueling with the V-man, and not to mention seeing the "echos" of his dead parents come out of the Priori Incanteum thingy. Harry has been through a lot. And in the beginning of OotP it seems like he's suppressed a lot of his emotions of fear and guilt and greif throughout the summer. Being forced to go back to the Dursleys when he probably was in dire need of emotional support probably wasn't good for him. A while back I remember someone here gave a detailed description of why Harry might have been clinically depressed during OotP, and I think I'd have to agree. He lashes out at his friends even though they try to help him. And his moods go from boyantly happy to sinking, cold, sadness, fear, and anger. He's been through a lot, and he has accomplished quite amazing things by the age of 15, and he's having to endure frustrating restrictions on him that are "for his own safety", but he is never given any explanation as to *why*. Why couldn't he leave the Dursley's and stay with Sirius or the Weasleys? What exactly was the deal with his visions? Nobody will explain these things to him; not knowing, and being left to his worries and frustrations only makes things worse for him and more likely to have the wrong impression. I think Harry's lashing out at his friends isn't a sign of him disliking them. Notice that it's only really Ron and Hermione that he gets angry with? (Well, Snape, too. But that's a different story.) Ron and Hermione are probably the closest allies and friends Harry has. (Yes, even closer than Sirius. I can't picture Harry ever feeling comfortable yelling at Sirius.) He can safely yell at Ron and Hermione because he *knows* that they are loyal to him, and that no matter how loud he might yell, they'll still be his friends and care about him. He's taking advantage of that fact a bit too much, IMO, but there you have it. (On a side note, I've often thought that Harry treats Ron and Hermione slightly like parents. With parents [in most cases], you know their loyalty and care is unconditional, so you can yell as much as you please and still know they're there for you.) About the visions...these are horrendous things for Harry. They sound like a terrible migraine coupled with disturbing feelings and visions that aren't his own...and to not even know what they are or what they mean? And being inside the snake that attacked Arthur Weasley? That alone would be enough to push me over the edge. You're right about Harry being resilient and positive, though. I think a lot of other people would have completely snapped before now, if in his situation. Harry is still the same boy you saw in PS/SS, he's just very near breaking point right now. I think OotP was like the final straw for a lot of things. I think in book 6 Harry's going to have to get a hold of himself emotionally. He's going to need to grieve for Sirius, as well as forgive himself and come to terms with the Prophecy. Harry'll bounce back to his good ol' self eventually. =) Java: > But other times, it just seems like it's reflecting the author's own > state of mind. The whole thing about media franzy, and frustration > over politics are very adult oriented. Maybe I'm just too old, but do > 15-year old actually worry about the power struggle between ministry > and school? I've graduated from school and started working already, > and still just kinda getting to know the whole office politics and > power struggle thing. Hermione must be extremely smart and wise to > figure that out all by herself at the tender age of 15. Maddy: I think it's a mix of the two, really. JKR *does* know what it's like to have the media talking about you. But that *is* something that Harry's facing. I realize that it's up to JKR what Harry has to face, but I think it is realistic. JKR's writing what she knows, I guess. I think when you're Harry Potter, you do have to worry about politics. Notice that the majority of other kids don't all follow the news and aren't wise to the subtle politics within and without Hogwarts. Hermione is a definitely a smart cookie, but today we found out that she is in fact 16 throughout most of OotP (http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/faq_view.cfm?id=90). So that explains it somewhat, I guess. =) Maddy (who really didn't intend for this post to be so terrifyingly long, and really should be studying instead of posting) From imamommy at sbcglobal.net Sat Dec 11 04:19:43 2004 From: imamommy at sbcglobal.net (imamommy at sbcglobal.net) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 04:19:43 -0000 Subject: Guarding the Stone In-Reply-To: <02F380D1-4AC1-11D9-8177-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119689 imamommy: I really do like this theory, and just had a couple of comments. --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Barry Arrowsmith wrote: Snip > A slight digression - a timing anomaly; it's afternoon when the trio > decide to lay their suspicions before DD, and McGonagall tells them > that he left for the Ministry 10 minutes previously. It's many hours > later that they go through the trapdoor - yet when DD is oozing concern > over Harry he intimates that all those hours were taken up with getting > to London and back. Yeah, sure. imamommy: Well, how long doew it take to get to London and back by thestral? It could be several hours. Hagrid mentions that DD sometimes takes them for trips. > Why would he put Harry in danger? you may ask. It's unlikely that Harry > was in any real danger with DD lurking in the background. And there is > a rationale of sorts: Harry has protection against Voldy, Voldy does > not have protection against Harry. Voldy is foiled (yet again) and > retires to Costa Adriatica to nurse his vaporous ego, this time for two > years or so. And as DD says: > > "Nevertheless, Harry, while you may only have delayed his return to > power [...] - and if he is delayed again, and again, why, he may never > return to power." > > And a delay is what DD needs. Harry may well be the one to knock > Voldy off his perch - but not when he's aged 11, he's not. Yet Voldy > seems to be ready for his comeback, he's getting on his feet (or > somebody else's, but it amounts to the same thing). He *has* to be > knocked back, delayed until Harry gets more magic under his belt. The > Stone stratagem will do it. > > It'll lure Voldy out and Harry's protection will make certain he's sent > back to the state he was in after Godric's Hollow. You don't think that > it was mere chance that the protections for the Stone could be > circumvented by the Trio do you? > Not likely! Not with Puppetmaster!DD in charge. > > Kneasy imamommy: I think, if this theory holds up, in addition to delaying VM, DD was also taking an opportunity to test Harry. Why do you suppose it took Quirrell all year to get through to the mirror? Was it just Fluffy? or were there different, more difficult obstacles that were abandoned for that night alone? I think DD set the bait for Harry when he had Hagrid retrieve the stone from the vault. imamommy From stevejjen at earthlink.net Sat Dec 11 04:23:31 2004 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 04:23:31 -0000 Subject: JKR's cryptic answer: Who sent the Lestranges to the Longbottoms? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119690 Spoiler here for anyone not reading JKR updates! * * * * * * * * * * * Rumours Section: Q: The Lestanges were sent after Neville to kill him. JKR: "No, they weren't, they were very definitely sent after Neville's parents. I can't say too much about this because it touches too closely on the prophecy and how many people knew about it, but the Lestranges were not in on the secret." Jen: Whew! This wasn't what I expected to hear. I've always believed the Lestranges attacked Neville's parents to get information about the prophecy, to get an explanation of why LV turned to vapour at GH. But no! The Lestanges 'were not in on the secret' so their visit to the Longbottoms was for another mysterious reason. And who sent them there? LV was not giving orders anymore, so who was second in command? Maybe it was the same person who overheard part of the prophecy. I'm stumped on this one. Most of the DE's were trying to talk their way out of Azkaban about this time, yet the Lestranges and at least one superior were still carrying out a secret operation. The other interesting point about this answer: If the Lestranges didn't know about the propehcy, then the Longbottms surely did. Why else include the prophecy in this answer otherwise? It always seemed logical the Longbottoms would have been informed, like the Potters, but this makes me even more certain. Jen, with more questions than answers as usual ;). From imamommy at sbcglobal.net Sat Dec 11 04:31:14 2004 From: imamommy at sbcglobal.net (imamommy at sbcglobal.net) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 04:31:14 -0000 Subject: Dudders and the Dementors In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119691 > > Tammy replies: > > Good catch, indeed it's true that the dementors "dissolved into a > silver mist" before Mrs. Figg makes her entrance. Harry even takes a > moment to contemplate before Mrs. Figg comes running in. > > I still think Mrs. Figg lied though, if only from her behaviour at the > hearing. Plus, could she really have seen the whole thing happen? If > she did, why did she stay away, why not come up and give Harry at > least moral support? > > -Tammy imamommy: Or started shouting for Mundungus earlier? For anyone who used to watch Bewitched, I keep expecting him to turn up and say he's been in Bombay;) My guess is that if she felt the effects, but couldn't actually see the dementors that 1) she felt too horrible to help Harry or 2) she realized too late what was going on. I think if DD had instructed her to lie, he would have told her more about the way dementors move. I think she did this on her own. imamommy From dk59us at yahoo.com Sat Dec 11 04:43:56 2004 From: dk59us at yahoo.com (Eustace_Scrubb) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 04:43:56 -0000 Subject: What Mrs. Figg saw (was Re: Dudders and the Dementors) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119692 Tammy: > I still think Mrs. Figg lied though, if only from her behaviour at the > hearing. Plus, could she really have seen the whole thing happen? If > she did, why did she stay away, why not come up and give Harry at > least moral support? > > -Tammy Eustace_Scrubb: I agree that Mrs. Figg, umm, embellished her testimony, but luckily her description of the sensation of being near dementors was accurate and convincing enough to carry weight with the tribunal. And I believe that she did witness Harry's attempts at a Patronus, both successful and unsuccessful. I think that part of her testimony was absolutely truthful. I think that few persons, whether wizard, witch, squib or muggle, would have the courage or self-control to go towards dementors that were on the attack--particularly if the only thing that person could do about it was offer "moral support." Mrs. Figg's role in Little Whinging was to be a sentinel. Dumbledore could never have expected that she would rush to Harry's aid in a dementor attack. Now, I wonder, did Mrs. Figg ever live in a place called Godric's Hollow? Cheers, Eustace_Scrubb From dk59us at yahoo.com Sat Dec 11 05:07:10 2004 From: dk59us at yahoo.com (Eustace_Scrubb) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 05:07:10 -0000 Subject: JKR's cryptic answer: Who sent the Lestranges to the Longbottoms? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119693 Jen wrote: > Spoiler here for anyone not reading JKR updates! > * > * > * > * > * > * > * > * > * > * > * > Rumours Section: > > Q: The Lestranges were sent after Neville to kill him. > > JKR: "No, they weren't, they were very definitely sent after > Neville's parents. I can't say too much about this because it > touches too closely on the prophecy and how many people knew about > it, but the Lestranges were not in on the secret." > > > Jen: Whew! This wasn't what I expected to hear. I've always believed > the Lestranges attacked Neville's parents to get information about > the prophecy, to get an explanation of why LV turned to vapour at GH. > > But no! The Lestanges 'were not in on the secret' so their visit to > the Longbottoms was for another mysterious reason. And who sent them > there? LV was not giving orders anymore, so who was second in > command? Maybe it was the same person who overheard part of the > prophecy. > > I'm stumped on this one. Most of the DE's were trying to talk their > way out of Azkaban about this time, yet the Lestranges and at least > one superior were still carrying out a secret operation. > > The other interesting point about this answer: If the Lestranges > didn't know about the prophecy, then the Longbottoms surely did. Why > else include the prophecy in this answer otherwise? It always seemed > logical the Longbottoms would have been informed, like the Potters, > but this makes me even more certain. Eustace_Scrubb: This _is_ interesting news. I have felt previously that Voldemort did not share the prophecy with the Death Eaters, not even Bellatrix. Why tell them, unless to give LV yet another opportunity for an Evil Overlord speech? The Potters and the Longbottoms had each "defied" Voldemort three times. Ample excuse to make an example of them. I think the Death Eaters knew that the attacks would occur, but not why. What if the Lestrange cell was following contingency orders given by Voldemort himself? (Go after the Longbottoms if the Potter operation is successful but you haven't heard from me in 24 hours?) Since the Potters were killed, and the DEs did not know about the prophecy, they'd be likely to suspect the Longbottoms had something to do with LV's disappearance anyway. I agree that the Longbottoms were highly likely to have been informed of the prophecy. And I think this news makes it more likely that the attack on the Longbottoms was relatively close in time to Godric's Hollow. I'll put a caveat on that, though, as I haven't read the JKR site myself lately and I suppose she may have said something to deflate this idea. Cheers, Eustace_Scrubb From doddiemoemoe at yahoo.com Sat Dec 11 06:55:19 2004 From: doddiemoemoe at yahoo.com (doddiemoemoe) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 06:55:19 -0000 Subject: JKR's cryptic answer: Who sent the Lestranges to the Longbottoms? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119694 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jen Reese" wrote: > > Spoiler here for anyone not reading JKR updates! > * > * > * > * > * > * > * > * > * > * > * > Rumours Section: > > Q: The Lestanges were sent after Neville to kill him. > > JKR: "No, they weren't, they were very definitely sent after > Neville's parents. I can't say too much about this because it > touches too closely on the prophecy and how many people knew about > it, but the Lestranges were not in on the secret." > > > Jen: Whew! This wasn't what I expected to hear. I've always believed > the Lestranges attacked Neville's parents to get information about > the prophecy, to get an explanation of why LV turned to vapour at GH. > > But no! The Lestanges 'were not in on the secret' so their visit to > the Longbottoms was for another mysterious reason. And who sent them > there? LV was not giving orders anymore, so who was second in > command? Maybe it was the same person who overheard part of the > prophecy. > > I'm stumped on this one. Most of the DE's were trying to talk their > way out of Azkaban about this time, yet the Lestranges and at least > one superior were still carrying out a secret operation. > > The other interesting point about this answer: If the Lestranges > didn't know about the propehcy, then the Longbottms surely did. Why > else include the prophecy in this answer otherwise? It always seemed > logical the Longbottoms would have been informed, like the Potters, > but this makes me even more certain. > > Jen, with more questions than answers as usual ;). Doddiemoe here: I always thought that the "longbottom torture" happened extremely close to the Potter Parent's deaths...(hence this is why they were all arrested..the DE's I mean) Voldemort went to godrics hollow and sent DE's to torture the parents/grandparents(perhaps this was how/who neville saw die..his grandpa)...Maybe Neville's grandmother is upset, or more likely, dissappointed that neville didn't fullfil the prophecy in the same way Harry did...(hence his father showed talent, but not him...) I always thought that Voldemort sent DE's to both residences...but went to one first..and apparently marked harry first...(I would imagine that James and Lily would make short work of DE's that showed up to their residences first). As far as prophecies go...it doesn't matter if it applies to one or another...prophecy's apply only to those who fulfill them. (frustratingly true--hence it is the choices we make--which makes harry's choices even more important from here on out.) Unless Neville figures out what the candy wrappers mean before the rest of us...(my guess is...since none of the other word finds turned out anything significant then Neville's mother is handing him more than ONE TYPE of candy wrapper! If I had to fathom a guess...it would be that 1. Voldemort sent the Le'stranges to the Longbottoms.... and that 2. Voldemort sent the Malfoys to the Potters.. and 3. History is doomed to repeat itself.. I can see it now...Le Strange crew waiting at DE headquarters to tell voldemort what they discovered...waiting for Voldemort...and when Voldemort doesn't show they think they need to torture the Longbottoms for answers..(they went there and tortured them and received no answers to went back to DE headquarters only to hear Voldemort had disappeared and went back again...hence memory charm that may have been performed on Neville...and how he saw his grandpa die; and it was Lucious who convinced the Le'Stranges to go back to the Longbottoms for answers!). This is why DD believes Harry is the one and may be mistaken...or...may not be... We know from cannon that the prophecy may not involve Harry at all..it may involve Neville...why berate Neville for lack of talent..why go through such measure to prove he wasn't a squib.. Doddiemoe --Who at this time pictures Neville holding a Mimbulous Mimmbletonia (sp?) and poking it with a wicked hangnail splashing Voldemort's face with it's stink sap and Voldemort Screaming how he's melting,melting,melting...-- From Meliss9900 at aol.com Sat Dec 11 07:16:28 2004 From: Meliss9900 at aol.com (Meliss9900 at aol.com) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 02:16:28 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Jo's site and Snape's timeline in OOTP Message-ID: <195.3428bdeb.2eebf8cc@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119695 In a message dated 12/10/2004 11.25 Central Standard Time, Snarryfan at aol.com writes: > So, if this birdie thing is what Snape used in OOTP, it weights in > why it takes so much time for Snape to warn Sirius and later DD and > the Order about Harry. > > It's not a instant message thing, it takes time, more if the receiver > is far away. > > I really seem to remember Dumbledore (or maybe it was another order member) saying that the order had more efficient methods of communication than Flue powder ect. So would would slower really be more efficient? I can see this silver thing as being more reliable (as in less likely to be intercepted) but not not as good in emergency situations. Melissa [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From ohneill_2001 at yahoo.com Sat Dec 11 07:17:37 2004 From: ohneill_2001 at yahoo.com (ohneill_2001) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 07:17:37 -0000 Subject: SHIP: Ron & Hermione (was Re: Hermione's Patronus) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119696 Luna wrote: > Actually, if we limit ourselves to the books, you are right, you can > find clues for any ship you can think of. But if we follow JKR > answers to questions in the shippy side, you'll realize that she is > following a pattern: *snip* Now Cory: Hi Luna, All I was doing in my post was to clarify the quote that Dawn originally posted, which was incorrect. I was not attempting to explain every quote JKR has ever given on the subject, nor was I trying to advocate one ship over the other. I was correcting misinformation; nothing more. I really don't care enough about the shipping debate to devote a great deal of time to thinking about it; all I will say is that it would not shock me if any of the foreseeable ships happened, and I don't think JKR has given us a straight answer on the question (nor will she or should she). --Cory From eggplant9998 at yahoo.com Sat Dec 11 07:27:30 2004 From: eggplant9998 at yahoo.com (eggplant9998) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 07:27:30 -0000 Subject: Angry Harry in HBP? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119697 "javalorum" wrote: > Harry being angry and arrogant is really my general > disappointment with ootp Exactly right, Yea, why was Harry so angry? I really can't imagine why. Just because your mother, father and beloved godfather were murdered, and a sadistic teacher made you carve untrue words into your living bleeding flesh, and everyone was calling you a silly glory seeking little brat after you had just saved the entire world at the grave risk of your own life, and you had been bitten by a huge massively evil snake and been convinced you were seconds from eternal oblivion, and the ministry wanted to put you in the hell hole they call Azkaban for the crime of defending your life and that of your cousin, and you were in agony from the sting of a spider the size of a small elephant, and you were tied to a tombstone and tortured so hideously you really and truly wanted to die; well, it's unfortunate of course but no reason for getting all grumpy. Harry must be a silly little wimp to make tinny tiny little things like that bother him. I'm sure in similar circumstances you would have behaved far far more heroically. Eggplant From doddiemoemoe at yahoo.com Sat Dec 11 07:46:19 2004 From: doddiemoemoe at yahoo.com (doddiemoemoe) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 07:46:19 -0000 Subject: Sexuality as a theme in HP (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119698 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, olivier.fouquet+harry at m... wrote: > Some read HP books as mysteries, other like to see them as of the > adventure and fantasy genre, and some as fairy-tales. There are even > readers that see in them deep christian or symbolic meaning. In this > post, I try to explore the way I read them: as the journey from boyhood > to manhood, with an explicit reference to sexuality. Just as a > forewarning, I insist that the following will deal with adult theme. > Other posts on this subjects include #47966, #83372, #101297 and --major snippage-- I read through all the posts and just had to mention that you cannot proceed on the sexuality themed thesis with only the "serpent" in COS.. you were lacking in your symbolic feminine approach..it's not about the picture in Griffindor tower either... but if the serpent represented manhood/fatherhood/male coming of age...then it was the spider(symbolic of motherhood) who represents the female side..in psychology..arachnids are akin to mother/female issues.. I don't think this symbol in your theory is far off either if you see and take note of Ron and Harry's reactions to spiders in the story...nor how Hagrid goes out and procures a spider of his own who he takes care of. Psychologically---serpent=male then spider=female.. Doddie From imamommy at sbcglobal.net Sat Dec 11 08:09:43 2004 From: imamommy at sbcglobal.net (imamommy at sbcglobal.net) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 08:09:43 -0000 Subject: JKR's cryptic answer: Who sent the Lestranges to the Longbottoms? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119699 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "doddiemoemoe" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jen Reese" > wrote: > > > > Spoiler here for anyone not reading JKR updates! > > * > > * > > * > > * > > * > > * > > * > > * > > * > > * > > * > > Rumours Section: > > > > Doddiemoe here: > Snip > I always thought that Voldemort sent DE's to both residences...but > went to one first..and apparently marked harry first...(I would > imagine that James and Lily would make short work of DE's that > showed up to their residences first). imamommy: And fully-trained Aurors would not? > > As far as prophecies go...it doesn't matter if it applies to one or > another...prophecy's apply only to those who fulfill them. > (frustratingly true--hence it is the choices we make--which makes > harry's choices even more important from here on out.) > > Unless Neville figures out what the candy wrappers mean before the > rest of us...(my guess is...since none of the other word finds > turned out anything significant then Neville's mother is handing him > more than ONE TYPE of candy wrapper! > > > If I had to fathom a guess...it would be that 1. Voldemort sent the > Le'stranges to the Longbottoms.... and that 2. Voldemort sent the > Malfoys to the Potters.. and 3. History is doomed to repeat itself.. > > I can see it now...Le Strange crew waiting at DE headquarters to > tell voldemort what they discovered...waiting for Voldemort...and > when Voldemort doesn't show they think they need to torture the > Longbottoms for answers..(they went there and tortured them and > received no answers to went back to DE headquarters only to hear > Voldemort had disappeared and went back again...hence memory charm > that may have been performed on Neville...and how he saw his grandpa > die; and it was Lucious who convinced the Le'Stranges to go back to > the Longbottoms for answers!). > > This is why DD believes Harry is the one and may be > mistaken...or...may not be... > > We know from cannon that the prophecy may not involve Harry at > all..it may involve Neville...why berate Neville for lack of > talent..why go through such measure to prove he wasn't a squib.. > > Doddiemoe > --Who at this time pictures Neville holding a Mimbulous Mimmbletonia > (sp?) and poking it with a wicked hangnail splashing Voldemort's > face with it's stink sap and Voldemort Screaming how he's > melting,melting,melting...-- imamommy: Yes, but DD said something about the attacks on the Longbottoms coming just when the wizarding community was starting to feel safe...so probably not until at least a significant number of DE's had been arrested. Which brings up more questions. Who gave testimony against the Lestranges? Neville's Gran? Baby!Neville? Ooh, they aged Baby! Neville up a bit, had him testify, and that's why he's been memory charmed (probably). Who could have sent them, if not VM? Why did they assume that the Longbottoms had any information on their master, anyway? Who sent them? imamommy From spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com Sat Dec 11 08:25:51 2004 From: spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com (dungrollin) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 08:25:51 -0000 Subject: What Mrs. Figg saw (aside) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119700 Eustace_Scrubb wrote: > Now, I wonder, did Mrs. Figg ever live in a place called Godric's > Hollow? Which reminds me, whatever happened to Mr. Figg? And did you know that the Latin for potter is figulus? Think there was a theory about the Potters changing their name from something more old-and- rich-pureblood-wizarding-family-sounding at some point... Dungrollin From patientx3 at aol.com Sat Dec 11 10:32:28 2004 From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 10:32:28 -0000 Subject: Angry Harry in HBP? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119701 Java wrote: >> Harry being angry and arrogant is really my general disappointment with ootp. I'm sure a lot of people have pointed out Harry went from a quiet, mature, and happy boy and turned into a whiny angry punk. I liked SS (and the movie version too) because Harry was seeing things with positive, excited quietness which represented his strength and maturity. And I thought that was believeable and admirable even for a 11 year old. But in ootp, he is just completely self-involved. [snip] What I mean is, I liked the boy because he was a positive character, he overcame all that difficulty and still loved life and believed in goodness.<< HunterGreen (who has been away for awhile....darn Sims 2): Its interesting that you were so put off by Harry's attitude in OotP, because it felt a lot realer to me than the way he was in other books. He seemed to survive everything a little *too* well, with no longterm affects (nightmares, depression, paranoia) no matter what happened to him. If he had reacted that way after GoF, it would have been just ridiculous in my opinion. I'm curious why you're calling his behavior "whiny" when he's certainly experienced something that would rattle any adult, when he was only 14 years old. After seeing another student killed, being tied to a tombstone by someone he saved the life of a year before, watching the person who murdered his parents come back to life (so to speak), he was tortured, barely made it back alive, and then was sent home only a short time later to live with three people who hate him and the only communication he has with anyone is just cryptic letters to "be good" and that "there's a lot going on, but we can't tell you what." On top of that he's having nightmares, everyone in his world thinks he's a liar, the person he looks up to (Dumbledore) isn't speaking to him, and there is of course the matter of Voldemort being back. Everyone has a breaking point. The fact that Harry was calmer and more accepting of the bad things in his life before underlines how horrible things have gotten that he's snapped in this way. And he has, that's what's going on with him in OotP, he had something really horrible happen to him and no one really did anything to get him through it. Java: >> Well, when you're that arrogant, of course you'd think the whole world is against you. It's probably normal for teenagers, but for someone so determined like Harry to suddenly change like that is indeed a shock. << HunterGreen: As it should be. He was pushed over the edge. There's only so much someone can take with a smile on their face (not literally of course, I know Harry never walked around smiling all the time). Harry might be one of the few people who is justfied in thinking the world is against him, since a big part of it is. All the DE's are, of course, but the government who's supposed to be fighting them is against him too, and so is the (legitimate) media, and a chunk of his school. Even the people who aren't against him aren't really for him. The Order wants to keep him in the dark, Dumbledore won't even look at him, and at the beginning of the book his friends are making his situation worse by hinting at things they can't tell him. ::sighs:: And as for the teenager thing, that's one of my biggest pet peeves with regards to OotP. I don't think his behavior is all that motivated by his age at all, an adult in that situation, treated that way, would have a hard time behaving much differently. If everyone around you is treating you like a child, that's the sort of behavior they're cultivating. In any case, it was closer to basic anger than childish in my opinion anyway. Java: >> Maybe I'm just too old, but do 15-year old actually worry about the power struggle between ministry and school? I've graduated from school and started working already, and still just kinda getting to know the whole office politics and power struggle thing. Hermione must be extremely smart and wise to figure that out all by herself at the tender age of 15.<< HunterGreen: In this case the going-ons of the government is directly affecting them. Harry is getting set up to be expelled, the entire population is being put at risk because the (previously uncaught) DEs are being allowed to run free and no one is trying to track down Voldemort; and of course the entire school has to suffer Umbridge. Different people take a different amount of interest in politics, and in the case of Ron, Hermione and Harry, they were right at the center of everything during their summer, so its understandable that they'd have more interest in the ministry than the average 15-year-old. -HunterGreen (Rebecca) PS. Welcome to the group Java. (o; From dfrankiswork at netscape.net Sat Dec 11 10:53:14 2004 From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (davewitley) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 10:53:14 -0000 Subject: SHIP: Ron & Hermione, Harry and JKR In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119702 Cory wrote: > I > don't think JKR has given us a straight answer on the question (nor > will she or should she). My own view is that the SHIPpy bits are not a core element of the mystery aspect of the stories, at least in the current generation (viewed as bildungsroman, they are more important), and that therefore, in the early books at least, JKR sets the scene for R/H and probably H/G without any attempt at misdirection. However, again IMO, at some point (probably soon after GOF release), she became aware of the disputes in the fandom (the 'tribes' - wonderful word!) about the issue and, being what she is, recognised a whole new area to keep us all twitching on her chain, and has since ensured that everything she says is gnomic and tantalising. David From Vivamus at TaprootTech.com Sat Dec 11 11:25:33 2004 From: Vivamus at TaprootTech.com (Vivamus) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 06:25:33 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Angry Harry in HBP? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200412110625757.SM01080@devbox> No: HPFGUIDX 119703 > > > > imamommy: > > > > > > > > I would expect the boy to display the classic five steps of > grief: > > > > shock, denial, anger/bargaining, depression, and acceptance. > > > > These are the five steps people go through when something else > > > > traumatic happens to them. Each of these steps is essential to > > > > mental health for the individual. > > > > > > Vivamus: > > > It has been many years, so I could be mistaken, but as I recall, > > the five stages of the grief process, as outlined by (I think) > > Elizabeth Kubler-Ross, were Denial, Anger, Acceptance, Grief, and > > Resolution. [snip] > > > > Demetra: > > Actually, iammommy was closer. The five stages are: Denial (this > > isn't happening to me), Anger (I hate that this happening to me), > > Bargaining (I promise I'll be a better person if...), Depression (I > > don't care anymore), Acceptance (I'm ready for whatever comes) > > > > If I recall my university years, Kubler-Ross was specifically > > referring to the stages one goes through when coming to terms with > a > > diagnosis of a terminal illness. When applying them to the > grief over > > the loss of a loved one, I'm not sure that each stage > applies. > > How would bargaining would apply in Harry's case. He can't very > well > > say "I'll never ignore Hermione's warnings again if you just bring > > Sirius back from the dead" > Snip > > Demetra > > imamommy: > > I was referring to Harry's learning about the prophecy, which > is in a way like being diagnosed with a terminal illness. He > now knows (or thinks he knows) that either he has to kill > Voldemort, or Voldemort will kill him, so he is facing either > spiritual death (becoming a > killer) or physical death, or both. > > Perhaps he will try bargaining by an (short-lived, I'm sure) > attempt at giving up magic? > > imamommy Vivamus: I finally went to do a little research to prove my point, and found out . . . oops, I was wrong, at least in part. I did read Elisabeth Kubler-Ross' book "On Death and Dying" many years ago, but I had forgotten what it was about. She was, as imamommy suggested, talking about what a terminally ill person goes through in preparation for dying. And the stages were Denial / Anger / Bargaining / Depression / Acceptance, as Demetra said. I think I was reciting a list from a later adaptation of that work (possibly Paul Irion's "The Funeral and the Mourners," but I don't have it with me to check,) specifically aimed at helping bereavement (the grief process resulting from the death of a loved one.) THAT list was Denial / Anger / Acceptance / Grief / Resolution, as I discussed in the earlier post. While everyone's grief process is different, and no one HAS to go through a specific formula to heal, that describes the bereavement process better than anything else I've encountered. I have watched several hundred of people go through the bereavement process over the years, and while it looks very different in different people, that process (Denial / Anger / Acceptance / Grief / Resolution) does fit it very well. It is indeed different when you are facing a terminal illness (or any other impending bad news) than when you are dealing with a death. One can often be overcome with attitude, effort, or other means, but the other is irreversible. Bargaining with a deity (or other representative of Fate or luck) is a natural part of dealing with something approaching you want to avoid ("please heal John".) As Demetra suggested, it doesn't really fit for grief over a death. If someone is bargaining over a death ("please bring John back,") it indicates denial, because we know, deep down, that people really DON'T return from the dead. Also, for an impending death by terminal illness, Acceptance is very nearly the end of the road for grief, as there is often little time for anything else, since issues surrounding the illness tend to take over. In bereavement, OTOH, Acceptance actually has to happen before Grief can begin. It is only when we realize that the loss is real and permanent that we can begin to plumb the depths of our own sadness. Only when we get to those depths are we able to let the sadness "wash out", as it were, and stop being overwhelming. And only at that point can we really begin to put things back together. Imamommy's idea of Harry bargaining to avoid the "kill or be killed" rule he was given makes a lot of sense to me. And the terminal illness grief model probably fits that pretty well. Harry never did deal with the death of Cedric, but Cedric was really only a distant acquaintance. He got to know him only in GoF, and was only closely tied with him in the final task, when Cedric was so noble he would not take the cup when he had the chance. Even so, Harry still hasn't grieved for Cedric. His loss of Sirius, however, is an order of magnitude more difficult, for all the things talked about earlier. We'll see what happens, as JKR may have a completely different agenda for HBP, and there may only be passing reference to Harry's grief. (And that would not be wrong of her to do; as much as we might want to see exploration of a particular theme, she is the only true puppetmaster in this play.) Vivamus From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Sat Dec 11 02:08:54 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 18:08:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Muggle technology for communication? (Re: Jo's site) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041211020855.62640.qmail@web53105.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119704 --- javalorum wrote: > > Just curious, at time of great difficulty and war, > is it possible for > wizards to use muggle technology? I mean, > considering the other side > may not expect the usage of cellphones and such, > it's not likely > they'll try to monitor it (it's hard to track the > content of a call > if it's well ciphered anyway). Juli: Even if a muggle born wizard-witch would bring a cell phone to Hogwarts it wouldn't work (look into JKR's website under FAQ), so why would the Order Members use them to communicate since their leader (DD) is usually at Hogwarts? Juli From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Sat Dec 11 05:46:28 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 21:46:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Harry's Protection (was Re: Questions Message-ID: <20041211054628.96040.qmail@web53102.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119705 I know this discussion is over, but anyway. Reading the ending of PS/SS again I came upon this quote: (PS/SS Chapter 10) "But why couldn't Quirrell touch me?" "Your mother died to save you. If there is one thing Voldemort cannot understand, it is love. He didn't 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." This statment by Dumbledore makes me reconsider the whole power issue, it says very clearly here that the reason why Quirrel!LV couldn't touch Harry was because of the protection Lily left him, and this is love. I guess I'll have to eat my own words. Juli, choking after eating all her words about love been tacky or corny Glup glup glup From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Sat Dec 11 02:42:51 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 18:42:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Website Update SPOILER In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041211024251.20170.qmail@web53103.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119706 Juli: > > "Harry stand trial again in HP&THBP" > JKR: This theory has been put foward to explain why > Harry does not spend as long in Priver Drive during > this book as the previous ones, but I am happy to > say > that he leaves the Dursleys early for a much > pleasanter reason than a court case" > > This means Harry by June or July will be happy, > right? > Hell overcome his grief over losing Sirius and hes > just happy to get to the Burrow or to 12GP. But my guess (and wishes) are > that Sirius will be back, > Alla: > >...edited... > > I don't think that Harry will overcome his grief > THAT early in the > book, when school haven't even started yet. Or, if > he would, it will > be extremely dissapointing FOR ME. > Juli: I agree with you, if he's overcome his grief by chapter 1 or 2 or 3 it's just lame, I mean you can't recover from a close death so soon. > I speculate that specific event occur, which will be > pleasant for > Harry, not the rapid change in his feelings. I don't > know - > somebody's birthday party. > But whose B-day? AFAWK, there are only 5 birthdays during the summer: Dudley (June 23th according to lexicon), Harry (July 31st), Neville (July 30th), Ginny (August 11th), and Percy (August 22nd). Dudley's birthday is out of question, why would Harry be happy for his cousin's birthday? Then comes Neville, They've never been too close for Harry to be invited over for his birthday (even if his Grandmum let him have a party), Harry's birthday has never been to joyful anyway, then there's Ginny, but it's too late in the summer and also Percy's (And I doubt Harry would even care). According to the Lexicon Timeline, In OoP Harry left the Dursleys on August 6th, so in HBP he'll leave before August 6th. This leaves me with only two possible birthdays: Neville and Harry himself. And my vote goes to Harry. For once in his life he will have a nice birthday, his friends will give him presents and cake and he'll be happy, well as happy as you can be after a loved one has gone. > As to Sirius' return - you probably know that I > REALLY want this one > to happen, but I have the same objection - way too > early in the book. > I really liked the idea someone posted a few months ago about the Samhain (message 116646)according to the Celtic myth were the spirits on Halloween can cross over to the living word, and since Sirius was *alive* when he crossed the veil he could actually return. Anyways, this is on Halloween, long after the few weeks he'll spend at Privet Drive. > Somebody said that IF Sirius will return, it has to > happen when > Harry is completely (or at least majorly) came to > terms with his > death, otherwise it makes little sense plotwise. I > agree completely. > I agree, only then would this experience provide Harry with some growth. > I will be happy to be wrong on this one though. :o) Me too ;) Juli From madettebeau at gmail.com Sat Dec 11 12:16:34 2004 From: madettebeau at gmail.com (madlysarcastic) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 12:16:34 -0000 Subject: Snape's wound/Dumbledore In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119707 Christelle wrote: > I wonder if the "deep wound not healed" of Snape are not from Sirius > and James, but from Dumbledore himself. Maddy write: It's possible, I suppose. But I think it's more likely a mix between the two. I think what originally made Snape bitter/wounded *was* something to do James, but that Dumbledores's actions/reactions toward Snape since he joined Dumbledore's side. The way I see things, DD pulled some strings so that Snape didn't go to Azkaban for being a Death Eater because of whatever it is that Snape did. DD made Snape safe and gave him a job. No doubt Snape is greatful for this, and thus won't let his resentment for Dumbledore get the better of him. But I'm sure he does resent Dumbledore. In Snape's eyes as a student, I'm sure it seemed like James et all were given exceptions to the rules sometimes. (The mystery of Lupin being a werewolf, for example. And also making the former bully, James Potter, Head Boy.) Then every year Snape applies for the job of Defense Against the Dark Arts teacher, but is consistantly refused. And on top of it all, Harry comes along to Hogwarts and Dumbledore let's him get away with more than the average student, which no doubt reminds Snape of James and makes him hate Harry and resent Dumbledore even more. But he can't let himself be openly hostile towards DD because he is his boss, not to mention one of the few people who truly trusts Snape. I think it's a whole lot of bitterness and resentment festering that's got Snape all wound up. =) Maddy From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Sat Dec 11 12:57:41 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 04:57:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: JKR's cryptic answer: Who sent the Lestranges to the Longbottoms? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041211125741.37135.qmail@web53107.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119708 > Jen: Whew! This wasn't what I expected to hear. I've always > believed the Lestranges attacked Neville's parents to get > information about the prophecy, to get an explanation of why LV > turned to vapour at GH. > > But no! The Lestanges 'were not in on the secret' so their visit > to the Longbottoms was for another mysterious reason. And who sent > them there? Red Hen Publications has an interesting theory - see: http://www.redhen-publications.com/Potterverse.html page and the essay "The Minister of Magic - that I agree with. Once LV was (apparently) defeated, if not dead, then the most important thing was to hold the DE gang together and wait for his return or find out what was happening. And to keep the DE gang together, they had to take out Barty "The Terminator" Crouch Sr. as soon as possible. Red Hen posits that the attack on the Longbottoms was ostensibly to find out where Voldemort was and/or what happened - that the real purpose was to cause a huge stink that would embarrass Crouch and make sure he never became Minister, from which office he would hunt down and imprison everyone who even might be a DE or Dark Wizard. So someone (I'm betting Lucius Malfoy, suddenly thrust into the position of Interim Leader after a few years as inner circle member and possibly experiencing his first rush of personal power) organizes a few true believers into a suicide mission and sets them on the Longbottoms, who it's possibly known LV had an interest in for an unknown reason. As JKR reveals above, apparently the suicide mission themselves were unaware of the true reason for the action and who can blame Lucius for not telling them? God knows what Bellatrix would have babbled on the stand had she known the truth. (And of course going to Azkaban means Lucius doesn't have to put up with her presence in his family home for a several years - coincidence?) Magda __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From elsyee_h at yahoo.com Sat Dec 11 13:36:20 2004 From: elsyee_h at yahoo.com (Tammy) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 13:36:20 -0000 Subject: Website Update SPOILER In-Reply-To: <20041211024251.20170.qmail@web53103.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119709 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Juli wrote: > > Juli: > > > > "Harry stand trial again in HP&THBP" > > JKR: This theory has been put foward to explain why > > Harry does not spend as long in Priver Drive during > > this book as the previous ones, but I am happy to > > say > > that he leaves the Dursleys early for a much > > pleasanter reason than a court case" > > > > This means Harry by June or July will be happy, > > right? > > He?ll overcome his grief over losing Sirius and he?s > > just happy to get to the Burrow or to 12GP. But my > guess (and wishes) are > > that Sirius will be back, > > > Alla: > > > >...edited... > > > > I don't think that Harry will overcome his grief > > THAT early in the > > book, when school haven't even started yet. Or, if > > he would, it will > > be extremely dissapointing FOR ME. > > > Juli: > I agree with you, if he's overcome his grief by > chapter 1 or 2 or 3 it's just lame, I mean you can't > recover from a close death so soon. Tammy chimes in: As anyone who has lost a love one can tell you, you have moments of happiness thrown in with the grief. My grandmother lost her husband of 60 years last year in October. By the holidays already she was experiencing a mixture of happiness and sadness, which is a perfectly normal thing. I think that's what JKR is thinking of, making Harry's year 6 (and particularly his summer) a nice mix of happiness and sadness. > Alla (I think?) > > I speculate that specific event occur, which will be > > pleasant for > > Harry, not the rapid change in his feelings. I don't > > know - > > somebody's birthday party. > > > Juli (I think?) > But whose B-day? AFAWK, there are only 5 birthdays > during the summer: Dudley (June 23th according to > lexicon), Harry (July 31st), Neville (July 30th), > Ginny (August 11th), and Percy (August 22nd). Dudley's > birthday is out of question, why would Harry be happy > for his cousin's birthday? Then comes Neville, They've > never been too close for Harry to be invited over for > his birthday (even if his Grandmum let him have a > party), Harry's birthday has never been to joyful > anyway, then there's Ginny, but it's too late in the > summer and also Percy's (And I doubt Harry would even > care). According to the Lexicon Timeline, In OoP Harry > left the Dursleys on August 6th, so in HBP he'll leave > before August 6th. This leaves me with only two > possible birthdays: Neville and Harry himself. And my > vote goes to Harry. For once in his life he will have > a nice birthday, his friends will give him presents > and cake and he'll be happy, well as happy as you can > be after a loved one has gone. > Tammy replies: When I read JKR's comments, I also immediately thought of Harry's birthday. What if Hermione and Harry (+ more of Harry's friends) decide that it's high time Harry stop moping around the Dursleys and try to cheer Harry up by convincing the Weasley clan to throw Harry a nice big birthday bash? Maybe it'll happen at a place called Spinner's End :P That would provide a the nice mix of happiness and sadness I described above, with Harry being happy to be with his friends, happy about having a party for the first time ever, but still give him moments of sadness when he thinks about Sirius not being there. -Tammy From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Sat Dec 11 15:08:20 2004 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 15:08:20 -0000 Subject: Website Update SPOILER In-Reply-To: <20041211024251.20170.qmail@web53103.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119710 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Juli wrote: > > Juli: > But whose B-day? AFAWK, there are only 5 birthdays > during the summer: Dudley (June 23th according to > lexicon), Harry (July 31st), Neville (July 30th), > Ginny (August 11th), and Percy (August 22nd). Dudley's > birthday is out of question, why would Harry be happy > for his cousin's birthday? Hickengruendler: Not to mention, that Harry wouldn't have to leave the Dursleys for Dudley's birthday party. Besides, it already was around the end of OotP, the last days of june. > Then comes Neville, They've > never been too close for Harry to be invited over for > his birthday (even if his Grandmum let him have a > party), Harry's birthday has never been to joyful > anyway, Hickengruendler: Both of these things can change. Neville and Harry are now closer, and Harry's friend could decide to make a surprise party for him. I found both of this more likely than Ginny or even Percy's birthday, who are to late in the summer, as you correctly said. Besides, Percy and Harry are not exactly close. I agree that Harry's birthday party is a bit more likely than Neville's. However, I put my money on the big Weasley wedding. Bill and Fleur seemed pretty close in OotP. Maybe a wedding already a year after they met seemed a bit soon, but I still think it's possible, especially because in the Potterverse, everybody seemed to marry pretty early. Besides, there are two things I desperatly want to see in these books. The first is aa wizarding-world funeral, and since a graveyrad seems to play a role in the next books it seems likely that we will see a funeral. And the second thing is a wizarding-wedding. For dramatic purpose, it would even make sense, if in the beginning of the next book is a wedding and in the end a funeral. Hickengruendler From foxmoth at qnet.com Sat Dec 11 15:43:16 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 15:43:16 -0000 Subject: Jo's site and Snape's timeline in OOTP In-Reply-To: <195.3428bdeb.2eebf8cc@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119711 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Meliss9900 at a... wrote: > I really seem to remember Dumbledore (or maybe it was another order member) saying that the order had more efficient methods of communication than Flue > powder ect. So would would slower really be more efficient? I can see this silver thing as being more reliable (as in less likely to be intercepted) but not not as good in emergency situations. > Pippin: Dumbledore says the Order's methods of communication are "more reliable" than the fire in Dolores Umbridges office. He doesn't say they are more efficient. They probably aren't or they'd be in wider use. Snape didn't dare use any means that could be overheard by ministry spies, not if he was reporting that Harry was going to try to break into the Ministry. The time lag could also explain why Snape didn't try to contact Dumbledore directly even if he had "grown worried" as soon as he discovered Harry had not come back from the forest. Unlike the messenger spell, Dumbledore can travel instantly from place to place. If Snape knew when Dumbledore was expected at GP, and that until then Dumbledore was going to be further away from Hogwarts than GP, sending a message to GP was the most efficient way to reach him. We also don't know whether the messenger spell can find a recipient who is moving, or whose whereabouts are unknown. Of course they'd have been better off using a fellytone, but I'd guess this is just another one of Rowling's warnings against prejudice. Everything magical does *not* have to be better than everything Muggle. Pippin From jheiler at sympatico.ca Sat Dec 11 16:08:17 2004 From: jheiler at sympatico.ca (jeanico2000) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 16:08:17 -0000 Subject: Angry Harry in HBP? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119712 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "eggplant9998" wrote: > > "javalorum" wrote: > > > Harry being angry and arrogant is really my general > > disappointment with ootp > > Exactly right, Yea, why was Harry so angry? I really can't imagine > why. Just because your mother, father and beloved godfather were > murdered, and a sadistic teacher made you carve untrue words into > your living bleeding flesh, and everyone was calling you a silly > glory seeking little brat after you had just saved the entire world > at the grave risk of your own life, and you had been bitten by a > huge massively evil snake and been convinced you were seconds from > eternal oblivion, and the ministry wanted to put you in the hell > hole they call Azkaban for the crime of defending your life and that > of your cousin, and you were in agony from the sting of a spider the > size of a small elephant, and you were tied to a tombstone and > tortured so hideously you really and truly wanted to die; well, > it's unfortunate of course but no reason for getting all > grumpy. > > Harry must be a silly little wimp to make tinny tiny little things > like that bother him. I'm sure in similar circumstances you would > have behaved far far more heroically. > > Eggplant At last! I was starting to think that I was the only one who thought it normal that Harry was so angry in book 5! I agree with you 100% on this, Eggplant. If JK Rowling had written Harry's character any differently in OOTP, it would'nt have been normal or natural. The fact that Harry is so human and normal in his reactions is what makes him so deeply endearing to me. The fact that he's been through so much at his age and is still a whole person capable of feelings such as caring and loving is proof of his incredible inner strength. The fact that he feels betrayed and angry and doesn't trust easily is, to me, the absolute proof that he is human. I would have reacted the same way. No, wait... I would have died of fright the first time I saw Voldermort stuck to the back of Quirrel's head! Nicole From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Dec 11 16:16:31 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 16:16:31 -0000 Subject: Guarding the Stone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119713 Kneasy wrote: > > > What I'd really like to know.... DD arrives in time to pull Quirrell off Harry. > > Harry remembers this - the voice, Quirrell's arms being wrenched from his grasp. > > Was Voldy still there? > > Oh, and ignore film contamination, please. > > > Tammy replied: > I would say that Voldemort probably left when Quirrell was in so much pain right around the time that the pain in Harry's scar made him pass out. Whatever else that scar is, it does seem to be an indicator of Voldemort's emotions, and that blinding pain that made Harry pass out was probably going through Voldemort, with Voldemort's only option > being to leave Quirrell's body. > > Of course that doesn't preclude the idea the Dumbledore arrived and > did something to Quirrell/Voldemort to make Voldemort leave Quirrell. > > What I want to know is this: If Voldemort hadn't left before Quirrell died, would Voldemort have died as well (too lazy to look up if that's been discussed before :P ) Carol notes: Voldemort says in GoF that Quirrell died when he (Voldemort) left Quirrell's body--much the same fate suffered by the animals Voldy had previously possessed. Assuming that he's telling the truth, he was still inside Quirrell's head when Dumbledore came because Quirrell was still alive and trying to kill Harry at that time. (Why would he still want the stone if his master had left him, anyway?) In fact, Dumbledore's presence was probably the reason LV left, escaping but leaving his servant to die, his life and powers sapped by possession and maybe by drinking the unicorn blood that, IMO, mad him incorrigibly evil if he wasn't before. At any rate, Quirrell died *because* Voldy left, and Dumbledore must have known that he had resumed his existence at Vapor!mort. Carol From stevejjen at earthlink.net Sat Dec 11 16:20:40 2004 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 16:20:40 -0000 Subject: JKR's cryptic answer: Who sent the Lestranges to the Longbottoms? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119714 Eustace Scrubb: > What if the Lestrange cell was following contingency orders given > by Voldemort himself? (Go after the Longbottoms if the Potter > operation is successful but you haven't heard from me in 24 > hours?) Since the Potters were killed, and the DEs did not know > about the prophecy, they'd be likely to suspect the Longbottoms > had something to do with LV's disappearance anyway. Jen: I'm wondering whether the attacks happened so quickly after LV disappeared. In GOF we find out from Dumbledore the attacks occurred "after Voldemort's fall from power, just when everyone thought they were safe." (US, chap. 30, p. 603). That's a little ambiguous--did people feel safe the minute they learned he was defeated, i.e. the opening scenes of PS/SS, or does the 'fall from power' include the DE's coming forward and/or being arrested? Magda: > Red Hen posits that the attack on the Longbottoms was ostensibly to > find out where Voldemort was and/or what happened - that the real > purpose was to cause a huge stink that would embarrass Crouch and > make sure he never became Minister, from which office he would hunt > down and imprison everyone who even might be a DE or Dark Wizard. Jen: That's a good theory. Such a shame though if it's true, that the Longbottoms lost their minds and Neville lost his parents for a a scam. I always pictured it being a more noble moment, that they were safeguarding some crucial Order secret, you know? Dumbledore does say in GOF the "Longbottoms were very popular" which would make them a natural target for the DE's though. Magda: > So someone (I'm betting Lucius Malfoy, suddenly thrust into the > position of Interim Leader after a few years as inner circle member > and possibly experiencing his first rush of personal power) organizes > a few true believers into a suicide mission and sets them on the > Longbottoms, who it's possibly known LV had an interest in for an > unknown reason. Jen: I was thinking of Lucius too, but then...Snape popped into my head. Snape seems the best fit as the person who overheard the prophecy. If so, then he would know about the Longbottoms and could send Bellatrix and Co. to extract info without telling them why. BUT, given the timeline and Dumbledore's trust of Snape, it's unlikely Snape could be behind both the Potters' and Longbottoms' attacks and DD would still have faith in him. The more I think about it, Lucius does seem the logical choice from all the DE's we've met so far. (But that saps my favorite theory that Lucius isn't really loyal to Voldemort. Maybe it can be amended to say Lucius was loyal in the first war, but liked the taste of power too much to take orders again ). Jen From foxmoth at qnet.com Sat Dec 11 16:22:41 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 16:22:41 -0000 Subject: JKR's cryptic answer: Who sent the Lestranges to the Longbottoms? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119715 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jen Reese" wrote: > > Spoiler here for anyone not reading JKR updates! > * > * > * > * > * > * > * > * > * > * > * > Rumours Section: > > Q: The Lestanges were sent after Neville to kill him. > > JKR: "No, they weren't, they were very definitely sent after > Neville's parents. I can't say too much about this because it > touches too closely on the prophecy and how many people knew about > it, but the Lestranges were not in on the secret." > > > Jen: Whew! This wasn't what I expected to hear. I've always believed the Lestranges attacked Neville's parents to get information about the prophecy, to get an explanation of why LV turned to vapour at GH. > > But no! The Lestanges 'were not in on the secret' so their visit to the Longbottoms was for another mysterious reason. And who sent them there? LV was not giving orders anymore, so who was second in command?< Pippin: Who indeed? This makes it even more unlikely that Voldemort's second in command, who was thought in PoA to be Sirius (ch's 3 and 10), was actually Peter Pettigrew. At that time Peter was already presumed dead. It's unlikely to have been Lucius Malfoy, because Voldemort accused him of having done nothing to help his master return. It's unlikely that the attack on the Longbottoms was a set-up planned to discredit the Crouch family, though this is a clever idea. That could have been done without implicating Bella and the rest of her gang. No, I think the purpose of the attack on the Longbottoms was as given, to get information on where Voldemort was, by someone who could not go looking personally or ask himself. "Chained these twelve years"...and if it's not Peter, well, it has to be Lupin, doesn't it? Pippin From olivier.fouquet+harry at m4x.org Sat Dec 11 16:30:22 2004 From: olivier.fouquet+harry at m4x.org (olivierfouquet2000) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 16:30:22 -0000 Subject: Sexuality as a theme in HP (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119716 > > I read through all the posts and just had to mention that you cannot > proceed on the sexuality themed thesis with only the "serpent" in > COS.. > > you were lacking in your symbolic feminine approach..it's not about > the picture in Griffindor tower either... > but if the serpent represented manhood/fatherhood/male coming of > age...then it was the spider(symbolic of motherhood) who represents > the female side..in psychology..arachnids are akin to mother/female > issues.. > > I don't think this symbol in your theory is far off either if you > see and take note of Ron and Harry's reactions to spiders in the > story...nor how Hagrid goes out and procures a spider of his own who > he takes care of. > > Psychologically---serpent=male then spider=female.. > > Doddie Exactly! In fact, in my previous posts, I have written that I had not yet covered many thematic roles and mentionned specifically Aragog. Indeed, spiders are often seen as symbolic of dangerous feminity and thus I read Aragog as the danger of feminine sexuality to boys just as the serpent represents the danger of sexuality to girls. I am not sure but I think JKR once said Aragog would reappear in the series. If it is the case, I bet it will fit somehow in a storyline where Ron learns *things* with girls (my particular bet would be with Hermione). Olivier From Gregory.Lynn at gmail.com Sat Dec 11 16:33:22 2004 From: Gregory.Lynn at gmail.com (Gregory Lynn) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 11:33:22 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Hermione's age In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119717 On Sat, 11 Dec 2004 00:26:02 -0000, davewitley wrote: > > > is now confirmed by JKR's website as being a few months older than > Harry's. > > Cat, pigeons. > > David Which means that as she enters her sixth year she will be almost 18 and I can only assume that it won't have taken her that long to learn how to apparate. Has Harry ever left the Dursley's before his birthday before? Can't you see Hermione apparating into Harry's bedroom on the afternoon of his birthday to take him off so he can learn how to apparate? And will she put enough faith in Hogwarts, a History not to try to apparate there? -- Gregory Lynn From stevejjen at earthlink.net Sat Dec 11 16:44:10 2004 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 16:44:10 -0000 Subject: JKR's cryptic answer: Who sent the Lestranges to the Longbottoms? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119718 > Pippin: > Who indeed? This makes it even more unlikely that Voldemort's > second in command, who was thought in PoA to be Sirius (ch's > 3 and 10), was actually Peter Pettigrew. At that time Peter was > already presumed dead. > > It's unlikely to have been Lucius Malfoy, because Voldemort > accused him of having done nothing to help his master return. > > It's unlikely that the attack on the Longbottoms was a set-up > planned to discredit the Crouch family, though this is a clever > idea. That could have been done without implicating Bella and > the rest of her gang. > > No, I think the purpose of the attack on the Longbottoms was as > given, to get information on where Voldemort was, by someone > who could not go looking personally or ask himself. "Chained > these twelve years"...and if it's not Peter, well, it has to be > Lupin, doesn't it? Jen: I hate to say it, but that thought crossed my mind. (ESE!Lupin is like the proverbial faucet drip, drip, dripping until you finally crack ). OK, I don't really think it's Lupin. But it's odd we never hear about Voldemort's second in command. I do think there's evidence for Lucius. Like you said, Pippin, Voldemort accuses him of doing nothing to help him return; that's what you'd expect a second in command to do. The only other possibilty is one of the Order members who was 'presumed dead'. In JKR's world, presumed dead means you're up to something funny. Maybe Caradoc Dearborn will surface as the mysterious second in command ;)? Jen From carolynwhite2 at aol.com Sat Dec 11 17:06:20 2004 From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (carolynwhite2) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 17:06:20 -0000 Subject: WW communications (was Jo's site etc) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119719 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Meliss9900 at a... > wrote: > > > I really seem to remember Dumbledore (or maybe it was > another order member) saying that the order had more efficient > methods of communication than Flue > powder ect. > > > Pippin: > Dumbledore says the Order's methods of communication are > "more reliable" than the fire in Dolores Umbridges office. He > doesn't say they are more efficient. They probably aren't or they'd > be in wider use. > Of course they'd have been better off using a fellytone, but I'd > guess this is just another one of Rowling's warnings against > prejudice. Everything magical does *not* have to be better than > everything Muggle. > > Pippin Carolyn: I've never decided whether we have found out what Jo was referring to in this interview quote about WW communications: Q. Has Harry ever used the Internet? A. No. He's not allowed near Dudley's computer and Dudley's the only one who's got a computer. He gets beaten up if he goes too near the keyboard. So no, he's never used the Internet. I use it a lot but not Harry. Wizards don't really need to use the Internet but that's something that you'll find out later on in the series. They have a means of finding out what goes on in the outside world that I think is more fun than the Internet. Could anything be more fun than the Internet? Yes! Variously, it's been suggested that it's the portraits, or mirrors, or travel devices such as the Floo network and portkeys. Or magical books, rather like Riddle's diary, where you can literally lose yourself in the pages (shades of Jasper Fforde). Maybe she meant Gred & Forge's extendable ears ? But none of these things seem to quite fit, IMO. She seems to be indicating something which you can search for news and information. The closest thing I can think of that we have seen so far is a crystal ball. Are we not yet done with Trelawny and divination, I wonder? It would be a Jo classic misdirection - we are set up to regard everything to do with divination as farcical, even to the extent of severely doubting that the prophecies mean anything. And in the process, we don't realise that crystal balls can work, in the right hands? And what exactly does she mean by 'the outside world'? The muggle world ? Even though she's also told us that that it will always remain separate from the WW? Or just the WW outside Hogwarts or the UK? Sounds as though it will be very useful in the coming war, whatever it is. Carolyn From pjcousins at btinternet.com Sat Dec 11 17:39:53 2004 From: pjcousins at btinternet.com (confusinglyso) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 17:39:53 -0000 Subject: Questions about Boggarts Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119720 This post has been sitting on my hard drive for a while and now that the attack on the Longbottoms is being discussed again I wonder if Neville's boggart sheds any light. Questions concerning Boggarts Prisoner of Azkaban, "The Boggart In The Wardrobe" chapter. "Nothing to worry about," said Professor Lupin calmly, as a few people jumped backwards in alarm. "There's a Boggart in there." Most people seemed to feel that this *was* something to worry about. Neville gave Professor Lupin a look of pure terror, and Seamus Finnigan eyed the now rattling doorknob apprehensively. "Boggarts like dark, enclosed spaces," said Professor Lupin. "Wardrobes, the gap beneath beds, the cupboards under sinks - I once met one that had lodged itself in a grandfather clock. *This* one moved in yesterday afternoon, and I asked the Headmaster if the staff would leave it to give my third-years some practice. "So, the first question we must ask ourselves is, what *is* a Boggart?" Hermione put up her hand. "It's a shape-shifter," she said. "It can take the shape of whatever it thinks will frighten us most." This is all we are told about Boggarts. It is said to be able to think, Hermione's line above, so if it is a sentient being explains why is it not mentioned in "Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them" ? Does this mean it is a Spirit ? Not clear what happens after 'Riddikulus' spell, is it killed or is it forced to retreat to its hiding place ? Laughter at the end of the lesson, from Neville's second turn, causes the Boggart to explode into a thousand tiny wisps of smoke. If it is a Spirit, does it reform when it finds a hiding place ? For Harry's Patronus lessons the Boggart was kept for some time. The Patronus lessons show the Boggart's ability to exactly mimic a Dementor in drawing Harry's 'memories' of GH from his subconcious. The class lesson with Neville's Boggart!Snape 'Snape was bearing down upon him, reaching inside his robes.' What does this imply ? Could Boggart!Snape draw a wand from his robes ? Could Boggart!Snape then curse Neville ? Could Harry's Boggart!Dementor give the Dementor's Kiss ? Both Harry's and Neville's Boggart are threatening violence rather than just frightening them. We have not been told what would happen if 'Riddikulus' failed. Indeed, from the reaction of Harry's classmates in the above extract, some must have had bad experiences, and no defence, no knowledge of the 'Riddikulus' counter curse. We are not told what happens if 'Riddikulus'is not cast. Molly's extended experience with the boggart did not involve an 'attack', only horrible visions. A further question, why does Neville's Boggart!Snape appear about to draw his wand ? Has Snape done this to Neville before ? Surely Snape was not present when Neville's parents were tortured ? Or was he ? LV + Boggart at GH ? Boggart would appear as LV to James and Lily as they would be fearing LV's arrival. Indeed, during Voldemort War 1, would most boggarts appear as Voldemort to members of the wizard world ? Could LV's immortallity be associated with possession of a Boggart ? Could Dumbledore's ability to be 'invisible' without use of an invisibility cloak have anything to do with a Boggart ? An innocuous phrase " the only one he ever feared " referring to Voldemort fearing Dumbledore. Could a boggart ( or boggarts ) be useful in a battle against Voldemort by fooling Voldemort into thinking he was battling Dumbledore(s) ? LV leaving Quirrell at the end of PS(SS) is not described in the book. The media that must not be named had LV leaving in a manner very like the boggart is described above, 'a thousand tiny wisps of smoke'. As an aside, Voldemort's rebirth, did it use a mandrake, they are rejuvenating ? Questions from confusinglyso. Phil, still trying to keep up with discussions, but usually too slow to join in. From McGregorMax at ec.rr.com Sat Dec 11 17:43:19 2004 From: McGregorMax at ec.rr.com (mcmaxslb) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 17:43:19 -0000 Subject: Hermione's age In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119721 I think it is interesting that JKR makes Hermione the oldest of the Trio(previously JKR said that she was the youngest)now that in the HP world their ages have meaning. In HBP Hermione will turn seventeen and the underage restrictions will no longer apply to her, but the boys still are. I can see all sorts of interesting scenarios coming from that. From udderpd at yahoo.co.uk Sat Dec 11 17:59:14 2004 From: udderpd at yahoo.co.uk (udder_pen_dragon) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 17:59:14 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] JKR's Website Disinformation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041211175914.1026.qmail@web25305.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119722 As happy as I am to see information on JKR's website I have come to the conclusion that the majority if not all of what we learn is of no account. I personally will be very surprised if anything we have learned over the last few months proves to be of any consequence. I also believe that JKR could do with a beta reader before entering this information on her website (R.VdA springs to mind) because some of the information seems to be a bit suspect. i.e. Ginny's birthday? The day before Harrys expulsion hearing when all of the Weasleys and Harry were at 12 GP looking for somthing to distract Harry and none of her family wished her a Happy Birthday. In Britain it is an established fact that in general Girls mature quicker than boys, this is justification to make Hermione the youngest of the trio. To have Dumbledore (book and film) saying 'three thirteen year old wizards' when two of them are fourteen and the exceptional girl has been for about nine months, makes me wonder. I am going to stop now because I think that I have said enough. TTFN UdderPD 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 dontask2much at yahoo.com Sat Dec 11 18:26:19 2004 From: dontask2much at yahoo.com (charme) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 13:26:19 -0500 Subject: Wizards, Muggles, and Genetics (long) Message-ID: <009301c4dfae$eaf3db50$6701a8c0@MITRE.ORG> No: HPFGUIDX 119723 I've been a very vocal (and probably annoying) advocate that the books and JKR's statements about bloodline classifications like half-blood, Muggleborn/mudblood, pureblood and the like are relative to a genetics/bloodline/genealogy plan JKR has defined and has not been completely revealed to us readers. Harry discovers in CoS the racial inequality of blood heritage in the WW, and the more I read and the more she alludes on her website, the more I am convinced HPB is going to explain in depth what the WW society believes about blood heritage, and what's really TRUE about it. Sure, prior to this month, JKR gives us snippets about this with regard to her observation that her criteria for blood purity is eerily similiar to Hitler's, however some readers may not theorize the details she might have developed to support it as I do. The response she gave to the question of Squibs recently contains a reference to a dominant gene for magic, which means there is also a recessive gene which precludes magic ability. To put this in context for us Muggle types, this is similiar to blood type genetics you learned in Biology: A, B, AB, & O blood types. A & B genes are dominant over O, and a person's O blood type means that both parents gave the recessive gene together to their offspring. O blood type genes are recessive, as is Squibness (hey! I made a new word!!!) :) I think you might get the jist of where I'm going with this, but if you apply the same principle to Muggleborns - for instance, take Hermione and Lily. Each had 2 parents who gave them the dominant magic gene . How does THAT happen? Here's a thought: wizards in Hermione & Lily's parents' lineage way back when? In my mind, here's the real question: is the recessive nonmagical gene a MUGGLE influence, or did pureblood wizards have it all along? If wizards didn't have it and it was introduced by interracial marriages between wizards and muggles...well, a Muggle entering the mix of, say........ the pristine holier-than-thou pureblood Malfoy's lineage wouldn't be something they would want advertised, would they? Note that back in the Hogwarts Founders' days muggleborn wizards were being admitted to Hogwarts too, and you could think the marrying and cavorting about with muggles by wizards has been happening for a *long* time; perhaps most of these pureblood families aren't as pureblood as they think, no matter what they believe. On a related topic in CoS, Ron makes reference to "wizards would have died out" if they hadn't married muggles and I don't believe that statement means just in the recent past. If you ponder along those lines, one could submit that the reality may be that of those families who can be considered purebloods generation after generation, there are *very* few of them. This could explain the appearance of Squibs in wizard families and while not common, we've already met 2 of them in the WW: Argus Filch and Arabella Figg. Other than the fact Filch and Arabella grew up in the wizard community, what *really* distinguishes them from muggleborns? With the same upbringing as Filch and Arabella, could a Muggle perform the same types of activities they do? It's conceivable a Muggle could. Muggle, BTW, is defined by LV in GoF as "not a wizard." Ok, so the only difference in definition between Muggle and Squib is what community (WW or Muggle) you were born in? Interesting those possibilities, hm? There's also another another tantilizing comment Hermione makes in CoS when responding to Harry's worries about his abilities to speak Parseltongue; she tells Harry that Slytherin lives thousands of years ago, and for all they know, he could be related in some way to him. Siruis too makes reference in OoP, when looking at the Black family tree with Harry, how "pureblood" families like his, the Malfoys, and the Weasleys are all related: if you're going to maintain the purity of blood by marrying into only what you consider pureblood families, some rather unlikely cousins (like the Lestranges) you as an Order member are going to have. Mind you, I understand DD's statements about Tom Riddle being the last descendent of Slytherin - however one wonders if this means a "direct" descendent of Slytherin; James Potter was considered a pureblood and we've seen how easily pureblood families can be related by cousins removed and such as depicted by the Black family tree. Add to the foreshadowing the title of the book Siruis uses in OoP to smash the silvery instrument which scuttled up Harry's arm and tried to "puncture" his skin: Nature's Nobility: A Wizarding Genealogy. Blood might be thicker than water, but water can mix with blood. The question is when and how much, eh? Maybe we'll find out in HBP. charme From jlv230 at yahoo.co.uk Sat Dec 11 12:52:32 2004 From: jlv230 at yahoo.co.uk (jlv230) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 12:52:32 -0000 Subject: Jo's site and Snape's timeline in OOTP In-Reply-To: <195.3428bdeb.2eebf8cc@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119724 Christelle: > So, if this birdie thing is what Snape used in OOTP, it weights in > why it takes so much time for Snape to warn Sirius and later DD and > the Order about Harry. Melissa: > I really seem to remember the order had more efficient methods of communication than Flue > powder ect. So would would slower really be more efficient? I can see this > silver thing as being more reliable (as in less likely to be intercepted) but not > not as good in emergency situations. I am not sure if I am being a little hasty here but my first thought was that this silver communication device is in fact Dumbledore's patronus. I mentioned this in message 118204 a couple of weeks ago, but now I'm beginning feel that I am perhaps the only one who read this as a Partonus connection. If it wasn'a a patronus, what was it? http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/118204 In OOtP I was further convinced of the importance of Patroni by Harry's fight with Voldemort where patronus-producing happy thoughts seemed to help ward off you-know-who himself. I mention this again because I really *really* like the idea that Prongs will ride again and help Harry finally defeat his nemesis. As for security, I am quite sure that with an organisation like the OOtP, security is the most important thing: after all, think what happened to the Potters when their secret got out. Even if time is of the essence, security cannot possibly be compromised as it could endager more than just one individual - without the Order, it seems, the whole Wizarding world could be destroyed. Furthermore, I'm not sure that there was a timing problem with the communication at all. I thought the delay was because Snape *did* communicate quickly with Sirius, see everything was ok after all and then forget about it until he later realised that Harry had gone. Yours, JLV From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Sat Dec 11 18:58:58 2004 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 18:58:58 -0000 Subject: JKR's Website Disinformation In-Reply-To: <20041211175914.1026.qmail@web25305.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119725 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, udder_pen_dragon wrote: > > > > i.e. Ginny's birthday? The day before Harrys expulsion hearing when all of the Weasleys and Harry were at 12 GP looking for somthing to distract Harry and none of her family wished her a Happy Birthday. Hickengruendler: For the same reason you could argue that it is a mistake that Ron's birthday is never mentioned, since it is during the schoolyear and Harry shares a dormitory with him. It just isn't important. I think one reason that made OotP during some parts a bit boring (a bit, it still is my favourite book out of the five) is that JKR read in the forums and message groups many questions the fans were wondering, and she decided to give us something back and answered them in the book. Therefore some (seemingly, of course you never know) unnecessary informations were in the books, and there's no need to add more unimportant stuff like Ginny's birthday. > In Britain it is an established fact that in general Girls mature quicker than boys, this is justification to make Hermione the youngest of the trio. Hickengruendler: What an odd reason. I even agree with you that girls mature quickly, but that still doesn't rule out that Hermione can be the oldest of the Trio. >To have Dumbledore (book and film) saying 'three thirteen year old wizards' when two of them are fourteen and the exceptional girl has been for about nine months, makes me wonder. Hickengruendler: Maybe Dumbledore was just guessing or generalizing. Do you really think he knows the birthdate of every student? I think the only ones he knows are the birthdays of Harry and Neville, for a good reason. Or he was truly sneaky. Dumbledore was right, Two thriteen year old students weren't able to free Sirius when they were in the hospital wing at the same time. That's because one of them wasn't thirteen. But like I already said, that quote doesn't really contradict the information JKR gave us, at all. From dfrankiswork at netscape.net Sat Dec 11 19:20:30 2004 From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (davewitley) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 19:20:30 -0000 Subject: JKR's Website Disinformation In-Reply-To: <20041211175914.1026.qmail@web25305.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119726 udder_pen_dragon wrote: > As happy as I am to see information on JKR's website I have come to the conclusion that the majority if not all of what we learn is of no account. I personally will be very surprised if anything we have learned over the last few months proves to be of any consequence. That's almost certainly the case for the plot, but not necessarily for themes. For example, the information that Stan Shunpike would have received an invitation to Hogwarts probably is of no consequence to the outcome of the manoeuvres against Voldemort, but it is relevant for those who wonder about the nature of class and justice in wizarding society. David From garybec101 at comcast.net Sat Dec 11 19:25:54 2004 From: garybec101 at comcast.net (garybec) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 19:25:54 -0000 Subject: Did she give it away? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119727 Hey All; I had a revelation today while showing my daughter the FAQ poll. While I voted for the Neville question, I find the first question, interesting. S P O I L E R > > > > > > >> First Question; 1. How many chapters will Harry Potter and The Half-Blood Prince have? (disclaimer following). If she was not finished or at least almost finished, proofreading, editing etc, how would she know how many chapters it would have? IMHO, she must be done and is at *HER* editing process before she sends it to the publisher. I guess another explanation would be that she is almost finished and has everything outlined so as to know the final number. Or...she figures that by time she answers her poll, she will be done. Becki, (is really, really, really, getting her hopes up for a summer release.) From udderpd at yahoo.co.uk Sat Dec 11 19:58:35 2004 From: udderpd at yahoo.co.uk (udder_pen_dragon) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 19:58:35 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: JKR's Website Disinformation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041211195835.60826.qmail@web25306.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119728 davewitley wrote: udder_pen_dragon wrote: > As happy as I am to see information on JKR's website I have come to the conclusion that the majority if not all of what we learn is of no account. I personally will be very surprised if anything we have learned over the last few months proves to be of any consequence. then Dave Witley wrote That's almost certainly the case for the plot, but not necessarily for themes. For example, the information that Stan Shunpike would have received an invitation to Hogwarts probably is of no consequence to the outcome of the manoeuvres against Voldemort, but it is relevant for those who wonder about the nature of class and justice in wizarding society. now UdderPD You are quite right and I did actually think about this earlier and then forgot it when I posted earlier. It completely rubbishes all of the discussions we have had about the size of the wizarding population. If, as could well be the case, the majority of people we meet outside of Hogwarts, the OotP and the MoM never go to Hogwarts the Wizarding population could be almost anysize. If it were five percent of the population (approx=3,000,000) it could remain hidden if careful and explain some of the MoM's paranoia. TTFN UdderPD 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 --------------------------------- Win a castle for NYE with your mates and Yahoo! Messenger [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From madettebeau at gmail.com Sat Dec 11 20:04:17 2004 From: madettebeau at gmail.com (madlysarcastic) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 20:04:17 -0000 Subject: Wizards, Muggles, and Genetics (long) In-Reply-To: <009301c4dfae$eaf3db50$6701a8c0@MITRE.ORG> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119729 Chame wrote: The response she gave to the > question of Squibs recently contains a reference to a dominant gene for > magic, which means there is also a recessive gene which precludes magic > ability. To put this in context for us Muggle types, this is similiar to > blood type genetics you learned in Biology: A, B, AB, & O blood types. A & > B genes are dominant over O, and a person's O blood type means that both > parents gave the recessive gene together to their offspring. O blood type > genes are recessive, as is Squibness (hey! I made a new word!!!) :) I think > you might get the jist of where I'm going with this, but if you apply the > same principle to Muggleborns - for instance, take Hermione and Lily. Each > had 2 parents who gave them the dominant magic gene . How does THAT happen? > Here's a thought: wizards in Hermione & Lily's parents' lineage way back > when? > > In my mind, here's the real question: is the recessive nonmagical gene a > MUGGLE influence, or did pureblood wizards have it all along? Maddy writes: Yay! I'm not the only one who got all excited and starting pondering the genetics of the wizarding world... I must admit though, I hadn't thought about muggle borns until you mentioned it now. But if the magic gene is recessive, then I can't see how Muggle borns happen. Even if Hermione's and Lily's ancestors had wizard blood, it would have been passed on without skipping any generations, and then that would mean that they weren't muggle born at all. (beware...I'm going to go into bio-speak, here, but I think it makes sense even if you don't know much about genetics) If we let "M" and "m" represent the alleles for magic (M) and non-magic (m), with "M" being dominant and "m" being recessive... mm = the genotype of a muggle or a squib Mm, MM = the genotype of a witch or wizard mm X mm = mm (Two muggles or squibs will only end up producing non-magic children) Where as: Mm x MM = Mm, MM MM x MM = MM Mm x Mm = MM, Mm, mm (Witches and wizards almost always produce magical children.) With that I would think that Squibs would be a bit more common...and how do muggles with "mm" recessive magic genes spontaneously produce "Mm" or "MM" magic children? Unless it's possible to carry the magic gene, but not be dominant, then I can't figure out how it would happen. Are there any other biologists here with better knowledge of genetics to shed some light on this? JKR makes my brain hurt...lol =) Maddy From gbannister10 at aol.com Sat Dec 11 20:12:24 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 20:12:24 -0000 Subject: Harry's Protection (was Re: Questions In-Reply-To: <20041211054628.96040.qmail@web53102.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119730 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Juli wrote: Juli: > I know this discussion is over, but anyway. > Reading the ending of PS/SS again I came upon this > quote: > > (PS/SS Chapter 10) > > This statment by Dumbledore makes me reconsider the > whole power issue, it says very clearly here that the > reason why Quirrel!LV couldn't touch Harry was because > of the protection Lily left him, and this is love. I > guess I'll have to eat my own words. > > Juli, choking after eating all her words about love > been tacky or corny Glup glup glup Geoff: I hate to go into "told you so" mode, but I did quote this very section in message 119096 when Dungrollin was disagreeing with the "sacrificial love" faculty..... When eating your words, remember the advice given by Mary Poppins. "A spoonful of sugar helps the medicine go down in a most delightful way..." From spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com Sat Dec 11 20:39:21 2004 From: spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com (dungrollin) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 20:39:21 -0000 Subject: Wizards, Muggles, and Genetics (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119731 > Chame wrote: > > The response she gave to the > > question of Squibs recently contains a reference to a dominant > > gene for magic, which means there is also a recessive gene which > > precludes magic ability. To put this in context for us Muggle > > types, this is similiar to blood type genetics you learned in > > Biology: A, B, AB, & O blood types. A & B genes are dominant > > over O, and a person's O blood type means that both parents gave > > the recessive gene together to their offspring. O blood type > > genes are recessive, as is Squibness (hey! I made a new > > word!!!) :) > In my mind, here's the real question: is the recessive nonmagical > gene a > > MUGGLE influence, or did pureblood wizards have it all along? > > > Maddy replied: > Snip> I must admit though, I hadn't thought about muggle borns until you > mentioned it now. But if the magic gene is recessive, then I can't see how Muggle borns happen. Even if Hermione's and Lily's ancestors had wizard blood, it would have been passed on without skipping any generations, and then that would mean that they weren't muggle born at all. > > With that I would think that Squibs would be a bit more > common...and how do muggles with "mm" recessive magic genes > spontaneously produce "Mm" or "MM" magic children? > > Unless it's possible to carry the magic gene, but not be dominant, > then I can't figure out how it would happen. Are there any other > biologists here with better knowledge of genetics to shed some > light on this? Dungrollin: (Started writing this, then noticed Maddy's reply above, but can't be bothered to rewrite it) I agree that the magic gene must be recessive and the non-magic gene dominant, otherwise at least one of Lily and Petunia's parents would have been a witch or a wizard. (A little clarification for those who never learned this, or, understandably, erased it from their memories: You have two copies of each gene, of which you pass one to your offspring. Thus, of the two copies that you have, one copy came from each of your parents. If the two copies are the same ? e.g. Muggle/Muggle, then you're a Muggle, similarly if they're magic/magic, then you're a witch or a wizard. If they're different, then (aside from complications like co-dominance that I won't get into) one gene is expressed and the other is not, so it depends on which gene is dominant. If the magic gene is dominant, then magic/Muggle people would be witches or wizards, if the Muggle gene is dominant then they'd be Muggles or squibs. So if the magic gene is dominant, then for Lily to have been a witch, at least one of her parents must have had at least one copy of the magic gene. That would make one of her parents magic/muggle or magic/magic ? ie, a witch or a wizard. Geddit?) Charme again: This could explain the appearance of Squibs in wizard families and while not common, we've already met 2 of them in the WW: Argus Filch and Arabella Figg. Other than the fact Filch and Arabella grew up in the wizard community, what *really* distinguishes them from muggleborns? With the same upbringing as Filch and Arabella, could a Muggle perform the same types of activities they do? It's conceivable a Muggle could. Muggle, BTW, is defined by LV in GoF as "not a wizard." Ok, so the only difference in definition between Muggle and Squib is what community (WW or Muggle) you were born in? Interesting those possibilities, hm? But... If Squibs are just muggles brought up in a magical household, how can they see dementors? (Thinking of Mrs. Figg's insistence in the court.) If there's no difference in the magical ability of purebloods and Muggle-borns, being brought up in a magical atmosphere can't make that much of a difference, can it? Although there's the idea of magic genes acting as segregation distorters... Or the magic gene being mitochondrial, so only passed through the female line... Jumping magic genes... Not to mention, what exactly is the product of the magical gene? (If it is indeed only one gene.) Magical proteins? Magical hormones? Oh the possibilities are endless... I somehow doubt that JKR has gone into too much detail. What I'd like to know is what you call the non-magic offspring of a witch/wizard and a Muggle. Are they Squibs, or Muggles? Ho hum. Dungrollin From sunnylove0 at aol.com Sat Dec 11 20:41:22 2004 From: sunnylove0 at aol.com (sunnylove0 at aol.com) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 15:41:22 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] The Philospher's Stone (was: Harry's Protection (was Re: ... Message-ID: <81.1cd4c6dc.2eecb572@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119732 In a message dated 12/8/2004 12:56:59 PM Mountain Standard Time, eloiseherisson at aol.com writes: Eloise: I can live with that and the rest of your theory, but my problem is why Dumbledore had that opportunity. *Why* hadn't Voldemort already seized bodily immortality via the Stone. What if he did? When JKR posed the question we should have been asking, "Why didn't Voldemort die?", she said we might be able to guess the answer. What if it's one or two doses of the elixir? This would tie in to another question of mine: The Potters and Longbottoms escaped personally from Voldemort three times apiece. We know from OOP and JKR herself that Voldemort doing murders and dirty work himself is very rare (Dorcas Meadowes is "special" because of it) Did he go after the Potters and Longbottoms himself after the DE's had failed? Or did they come to him for a rescue mission like Harry.....the rescue of the stone. Amber Amber [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat Dec 11 20:50:29 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 20:50:29 -0000 Subject: JKR's cryptic answer: Who sent the Lestranges to the Longbottoms? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119733 Pippin: No, I think the purpose of the attack on the Longbottoms was as given, to get information on where Voldemort was, by someone who could not go looking personally or ask himself. "Chained these twelve years"...and if it's not Peter, well, it has to be Lupin, doesn't it? Jen: I hate to say it, but that thought crossed my mind. (ESE!Lupin is like the proverbial faucet drip, drip, dripping until you finally crack ). OK, I don't really think it's Lupin. But it's odd we never hear about Voldemort's second in command. I do think there's evidence for Lucius. Like you said, Pippin, Voldemort accuses him of doing nothing to help him return; that's what you'd expect a second in command to do. Alla: Don't give in, Jen, don't give in.:o) Personally, I am alsmost positive that it was Lucius. Sure, Voldemort accuses him of doing nothing, but at that point in time (at the graveyard), Voldie does not really have time to chat with Lucius or just Legilimenc him. Jen: The only other possibilty is one of the Order members who was 'presumed dead'. In JKR's world, presumed dead means you're up to something funny. Maybe Caradoc Dearborn will surface as the mysterious second in command ;)? Alla: True, very true. OR it WAS Snape who at that point in time did not deflect yet and decided to figure out what happened to his master. Isn't it a nice gult burden to carrY? :o) (No, I don't really believe that, but I think it is possible too) From sunflowerlaw at cox.net Sat Dec 11 21:17:11 2004 From: sunflowerlaw at cox.net (Lindsay W.) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 13:17:11 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Hermione's age and Ron's wand In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20041211130007.04143008@pop.west.cox.net> No: HPFGUIDX 119734 Can someone please show me the interview where JKR says that Hermione started earlier because she was clever, and/or is the youngest of the three? I have looked over the interviews twice, and even did a Quick Quote Quill search and can't find this at all! Also, concerning Ron's wand - she even says that different sources will say different woods for those dates. I imagine this is a deal where originally she had willow down for the Feb-March interval, and at some point her notes changed so that it was ash, and she forgot that it was already published in PoA as willow. I can very well see her being confused - if she used letters to indicate months, instead of numbers, then Ma. could mean both May or March - and you'll notice that the April-May interval is willow. Anyone who saw her notes in "Harry Potter and Me" can attest that they're rather...disorganized. PoA was published back in what, '99? I can certainly see her changing things around and not remembering it. --Lindsay From dontask2much at yahoo.com Sat Dec 11 21:27:24 2004 From: dontask2much at yahoo.com (charme) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 16:27:24 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Wizards, Muggles, and Genetics (long) References: Message-ID: <001301c4dfc8$35bbcd50$6701a8c0@MITRE.ORG> No: HPFGUIDX 119735 >> > Maddy replied: > > With that I would think that Squibs would be a bit more > common...and how do muggles with "mm" recessive magic genes > spontaneously produce "Mm" or "MM" magic children? > > Unless it's possible to carry the magic gene, but not be dominant, > then I can't figure out how it would happen. Are there any other > biologists here with better knowledge of genetics to shed some > light on this? charme responds: This is so cool!!! I didn't know how my post would be rec'd and I'm jazzed that people are asking the same questions I am. The one other question I have is if in Muggles magic is the RECESSIVE gene, and non magic is the DOMINATE one (the opposite of what wizards are supposed to have), and what a fine kettle of potion that would be to figure out.... Dungrollin: I agree that the magic gene must be recessive and the non-magic gene dominant, otherwise at least one of Lily and Petunia's parents would have been a witch or a wizard. If the two copies are the same - e.g. Muggle/Muggle, then you're a Muggle, similarly if they're magic/magic, then you're a witch or a wizard. If they're different, then (aside from complications like co-dominance that I won't get into) one geneis expressed and the other is not, so it depends on which gene is dominant. If the magic gene is dominant, then magic/Muggle people would be witches or wizards, if the Muggle gene is dominant then they'd be Muggles or squibs. So if the magic gene is dominant, then for Lily to have been a witch, at least one of her parents must have had at least one copy of the magic gene. That would make one of her parents magic/muggle or magic/magic - ie, a witch or a wizard. Geddit?) charme responds: Yep, I geddit. While I used the analogy of blood type to make my point, I could have complicated it more by using eye color genetics which is far more complex. For example, for a child to be born with blue eyes, it means both genes with all 4 alleles (alleles are variations of genes and for this illustration, 2 alleles to a gene) for eye color must be all blue as blue is a completely recessive trait. Brown swamps blue, and green will swamp blue too, however it's not all so simple as that, since their other variations in the 4 alleles which produce hazel and other multi shaded eye colors (lending to your comment about co-dominance.) But... If Squibs are just muggles brought up in a magical household, how can they see dementors? (Thinking of Mrs. Figg's insistence in the court.) If there's no difference in the magical ability of purebloods and Muggle-borns, being brought up in a magical atmosphere can't make that much of a difference, can it? charme responds: Per JKR's own website admittance, Arabella didn't see the Dementors but knew enough about the conditions and symptoms to know what the boys were experiencing. :) And I submit we are products of our environment in the Squib/Muggle comparison: Squib's aren't magical people, they have just been raised in the magical environment and know what to expect. Although there's the idea of magic genes acting as segregation distorters... Or the magic gene being mitochondrial, so only passed through the female line... Jumping magic genes... Not to mention, what exactly is the product of the magical gene? (If it is indeed only one gene.) Magical proteins? Magical hormones? Oh the possibilities are endless... I somehow doubt that JKR has gone into too much detail. What I'd like to know is what you call the non-magic offspring of a witch/wizard and a Muggle. Are they Squibs, or Muggles? charme, finally: Oh this is such a great question! :) It's also exemplifies exactly what I was theorizing about Squibs and Muggles: are they *really* that different??? From sunnylove0 at aol.com Sat Dec 11 21:34:03 2004 From: sunnylove0 at aol.com (sunnylove0 at aol.com) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 16:34:03 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Wizards, Muggles, and Genetics (long) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119736 In a message dated 12/11/2004 1:41:08 PM Mountain Standard Time, spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com writes: If the two copies are the same ? e.g. Muggle/Muggle, then you're a Muggle, similarly if they're magic/magic, then you're a witch or a wizard. If they're different, then (aside from complications like co-dominance that I won't get into) one gene is expressed and the other is not, so it depends on which gene is dominant. If the magic gene is dominant, then magic/Muggle people would be witches or wizards, if the Muggle gene is dominant then they'd be Muggles or squibs. So if the magic gene is dominant, then for Lily to have been a witch, at least one of her parents must have had at least one copy of the magic gene. That would make one of her parents magic/muggle or magic/magic ? ie, a witch or a wizard. Geddit?) Not necessarily. You're forgetting how genetic variation happens. Genes can mutate into original forms (there was no one afflicted with hemophilia in the royal families of Europe before Queen Victoria's children) and some genes can negate the indications of other genes (some children are born with the predisposition to cystic fibrosis and do not develop the disease due to other gene combinations--evolution at work). All this only reinforces how rare muggle-born (25% or less of the wizarding population) and squibs are. Amber [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com Sat Dec 11 21:41:30 2004 From: moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com (K G) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 13:41:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] What Mrs. Figg saw (was Re: Dudders and the Dementors) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041211214130.30126.qmail@web53504.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119737 Eustace_Scrubb wrote: Now, I wonder, did Mrs. Figg ever live in a place called Godric's Hollow? Cheers, Eustace_Scrubb hhhmmmm..... Harry's old nurse maid? hhhhmmmm..... could prove interesting!!!! moonmyyst --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From shrtbusryder2002 at yahoo.com Sat Dec 11 21:43:04 2004 From: shrtbusryder2002 at yahoo.com (Jason) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 21:43:04 -0000 Subject: Did she give it away? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119738 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "garybec" wrote: > > Hey All; > > I had a revelation today while showing my daughter the FAQ poll. > While I voted for the Neville question, I find the first question, > interesting. > S > P > O > I > L > E > R > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > First Question; > > 1. How many chapters will Harry Potter and The Half-Blood Prince > have? (disclaimer following). > > If she was not finished or at least almost finished, proofreading, > editing etc, how would she know how many chapters it would have? > > IMHO, she must be done and is at *HER* editing process before she > sends it to the publisher. > > I guess another explanation would be that she is almost finished and > has everything outlined so as to know the final number. > > Or...she figures that by time she answers her poll, she will be done. > > Becki, (is really, really, really, getting her hopes up for a summer > release.) She also said her third child is racing harrys new adventure into the world. To me that means the baby is due around the time she expects to be finished and shes trying to beat the baby. Isnt the baby due in january? Jason From moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com Sat Dec 11 21:48:14 2004 From: moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com (K G) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 13:48:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] JKR's cryptic answer: Who sent the Lestranges to the Longbottoms? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041211214814.7394.qmail@web53505.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119739 Jen Reese wrote: Spoiler here for anyone not reading JKR updates! * * * * * * * * * * * Rumours Section: Q: The Lestanges were sent after Neville to kill him. JKR: "No, they weren't, they were very definitely sent after Neville's parents. I can't say too much about this because it touches too closely on the prophecy and how many people knew about it, but the Lestranges were not in on the secret." Jen: I'm stumped on this one. Most of the DE's were trying to talk their way out of Azkaban about this time, yet the Lestranges and at least one superior were still carrying out a secret operation. Jen, with more questions than answers as usual ;). Who did the LeStranges take orders from in the MoM battle? Malfoy Who did LV welcome back in a rather interesting manner in GoF? Malfoy I think there is a lot more to him than we think. moonmyyst --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Dress up your holiday email, Hollywood style. Learn more. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From gryffindor.phan at gmail.com Sat Dec 11 21:52:31 2004 From: gryffindor.phan at gmail.com (Arya) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 21:52:31 -0000 Subject: WW communications (was Jo's site etc) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119740 Carolyn wrote: I've never decided whether we have found out what Jo was referring to in this interview quote about WW communications: Q. Has Harry ever used the Internet? A. No. He's not allowed near Dudley's computer and Dudley's the only one who's got a computer. He gets beaten up if he goes too near the keyboard. So no, he's never used the Internet. I use it a lot but not Harry. Wizards don't really need to use the Internet but that's something that you'll find out later on in the series. They have a means of finding out what goes on in the outside world that I think is more fun than the Internet. Could anything be more fun than the Internet? Yes! Variously, it's been suggested that it's the portraits, or mirrors, or travel devices such as the Floo network and portkeys. Or magical books, rather like Riddle's diary, where you can literally lose yourself in the pages (shades of Jasper Fforde). Maybe she meant Gred & Forge's extendable ears ? But none of these things seem to quite fit, IMO. She seems to be indicating something which you can search for news and information. The closest thing I can think of that we have seen so far is a crystal ball. ----------------- Carolyn, I'm wondering when this quote is from? Specifically, I'm wondering if it's before the publishment of GoF as that is when, IIRC, Floo as a means of mere communication is first introduced. I think I've leaned towards thinking it is the Floo Network. I even think I might have read an idea (or a fanfic) where someone proposed the Floo could be used like a television of sorts (to get a view in on a Quidditch game for example). Of course I'd say that sounds inefficient as the Floo is a main thru-way for travel and probably shouldn't be blocked up for mere entertainment. Arya From luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca Sat Dec 11 22:01:52 2004 From: luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca (Bee Chase) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 17:01:52 -0500 (EST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] The Philospher's Stone (was: Harry's Protection (was Re: ... In-Reply-To: <81.1cd4c6dc.2eecb572@aol.com> Message-ID: <20041211220152.28458.qmail@web52005.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119741 Eloise: I can live with that and the rest of your theory, but my problem is why Dumbledore had that opportunity. *Why* hadn't Voldemort already seized bodily immortality via the Stone. What if he did? When JKR posed the question we should have been asking, "Why didn't Voldemort die?", she said we might be able to guess the answer. What if it's one or two doses of the elixir? This would tie in to another question of mine: The Potters and Longbottoms escaped personally from Voldemort three times apiece. We know from OOP and JKR herself that Voldemort doing murders and dirty work himself is very rare (Dorcas Meadowes is "special" because of it) Did he go after the Potters and Longbottoms himself after the DE's had failed? Or did they come to him for a rescue mission like Harry.....the rescue of the stone. Amber Luckdragon: Yes! finally someone else. Voldemort either had or was desparately seeking the stone which both the Potters and Longbottoms had taken(possibly even stolen) and hidden. He went after it himself, because he could not trust anyone else to get it and actually hand it over to him. I still think it was in Harry's crib when Voldemort tried to curse Harry and that is why neither of them died. Harry was possibly in contact with it so he was only scarred by the curse, but Voldemort was a short distance away and although his wand may have touched Harry he still lost his body. The Potter's died because they were not touching the stone when struck with the curse. You have to have contact with the stone or drink the elixer made from it for it to work. There is possible discarded canon to back up this theory on Jo's site. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] 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 Sponsor Get unlimited calls to U.S./Canada --------------------------------- 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 beatnik24601 at yahoo.com Sat Dec 11 22:28:53 2004 From: beatnik24601 at yahoo.com (beatnik24601) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 22:28:53 -0000 Subject: Trio and Unity (was New Wand info,etc) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119742 Susanne wrote: She [Rowling] also wrote this: Harry, Ron and Hermione unite the three Ollivander wand cores(other wandmakers may use different substances, as shown by Fleur's wand,but Ollivander is widely acknowledged to be the best maker). > > Significant? Gregory Lynn replies: With all the story elements dealing with strength in unity and weakness in division, it would almost have to be significant wouldn't > it? > <> Beatnik comments: I don't know that the wands, specifically, will play a very vital role, or, IMO, JKR would have included Hermione's wood and core in canon, rather than just on her website. However, as Gregory says, unity is obviously an important theme, and I think the wands are just another way that the trio's diverse abilities comment each other and add to their collective strength. For example, (obligatory apology for this probably already having been mentioned) the members of the trio each represent one of the school houses, respectively. Harry obviously had talents prized by Slytherin, as the sorting hat tells him in PS/SS and Dumbledore tells him in CoS. Hermione's dominant trait is cleverness and intelligent, Ravenclaw traits, as Anthony Goldstein(?) comments in OotP. And Ron is overtly loyal, a Hufflepuff trait, always jumping in to defend his friends against Malfoy,etc. In a way, the four houses are already united in H/R/H. I think that the above example, and the wands are just symbolic of the fact that the unity of the trio, and of all the good guys, will be instrumental in 'vanquishing' LV (whatever that means). Beatnik From moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com Sat Dec 11 22:30:14 2004 From: moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com (K G) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 14:30:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Did she give it away? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041211223014.39814.qmail@web53501.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119743 Jason wrote: --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "garybec" wrote: > > Hey All; > > I had a revelation today while showing my daughter the FAQ poll. > While I voted for the Neville question, I find the first question, > interesting. > S > P > O > I > L > E > R > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > First Question; > > 1. How many chapters will Harry Potter and The Half-Blood Prince > have? (disclaimer following). > > If she was not finished or at least almost finished, proofreading, > editing etc, how would she know how many chapters it would have? > > IMHO, she must be done and is at *HER* editing process before she > sends it to the publisher. > > I guess another explanation would be that she is almost finished and > has everything outlined so as to know the final number. > > Or...she figures that by time she answers her poll, she will be done. > > Becki, (is really, really, really, getting her hopes up for a summer > release.) She also said her third child is racing harrys new adventure into the world. To me that means the baby is due around the time she expects to be finished and shes trying to beat the baby. Isnt the baby due in january? Jason I don't remember when she is due but she made the announcement on her web site on July 24th. If we figure she was 2 months along then, that would make her due at the end of February. If she was further along, then she is due sooner. That would make sense for a summer release as it has to go through all the editing and publishing, not to mention the advertising (not that any is needed!!!) moonmyyst --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From patientx3 at aol.com Sat Dec 11 22:35:57 2004 From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 22:35:57 -0000 Subject: Wizards, Muggles, and Genetics (long) In-Reply-To: <001301c4dfc8$35bbcd50$6701a8c0@MITRE.ORG> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119744 charme wrote: >> The one other question I have is if in Muggles magic is the RECESSIVE gene, and non magic is the DOMINATE one (the opposite of what wizards are supposed to have), and what a fine kettle of potion that would be to figure out.... [snip] While I used the analogy of blood type to make my point, I could have complicated it more by using eye color genetics which is far more complex. For example, for a child to be born with blue eyes, it means both genes with all 4 alleles (alleles are variations of genes and for this illustration, 2 alleles to a gene) for eye color must be all blue as blue is a completely recessive trait. Brown swamps blue, and green will swamp blue too. << HunterGreen: But 2 brown eyed parents can have a blue-eyed child, but not the other way around. It might be as you say charme, that the magical gene is recessive in muggles and dominant in wizards. Dungrollin: >> What I'd like to know is what you call the non-magic offspring of a witch/wizard and a Muggle. Are they Squibs, or Muggles? << charme: >>Oh this is such a great question! :) It's also exemplifies exactly what I was theorizing about Squibs and Muggles: are they *really* that different???<< HunterGreen: I think they have to be. From the evidence we have in the books and what she said on the site, a squib is a very rare defect, and a muggleborn wizard is somewhat common. JKR said that "A Squib is almost the opposite of a Muggle-born wizard: he or she is a non-magical person born to at least one magical parent. Squibs are rare; magic is a dominant and resilient gene." So if a witch/wizard had a non-magical baby they would be a squib. I think what JKR might mean by "dominant" here is that if two muggleborn wizards had a baby their chances of having a squib are the same as two pureblood wizards. Meaning that the magical gene in its activated form will always beat out any muggle genes, except in rare cases of squibs. It makes me wonder if *every* generation would still have the same chance of getting the wizard gene (if every generation married a muggle), or if it would get less likely with time. It must. Otherwise how do you explain the large number (25%) of the Hogwarts populace that are muggleborn? And if it is a strange occurence not based on the genes of the parents then its an amazing coincidence that kids like Colin and Dennis are *both* muggleborns (unless of course one of their parents is a wizard or a squib, I suppose). Now that leads me to another question, are squib genes the same as magic genes when it comes to having a baby? Or are they like muggle genes? I used to think they were, but since it is the non-activated side of the magic gene, perhaps it becomes recessive. From manawydan at ntlworld.com Sat Dec 11 22:37:47 2004 From: manawydan at ntlworld.com (manawydan) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 22:37:47 -0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] website SPOILERS . Who goes to Hogwarts References: <1102741695.16852.74476.m24@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <002301c4dfd2$0b21b0a0$704b6d51@f3b7j4> No: HPFGUIDX 119745 Lexicon Steve wrote >What I immediately noticed is that she only half-way answered the >question. So did Stan Shunpike go to Hogwarts? How common is it for >people NOT to go? All this tells us is that the invitation goes out. >What percentage of people say yes? If almost everyone says yes, then >the total number of school age Wizarding children in Britain is >frightfully small -- at most a thousand, as per Jo's comment. That's >the size of a small high school in the United States, and most >communities have a number of such high schools. This really is the biggie, for those anoraks among us who are interested in the contextual side of things. If nearly all families take up the offer of a place, then we'd probably be looking at a wizarding population of somewhere above 25,000. But that's hard to reconcile with canon - is it _really_ reasonable, for example, to conceive of 4 x the entire population of the British Isles turning up for the Quidditch World Cup final? Or indeed, that number of people providing the fan base for the number of professional Quidditch sides that we know exist. But we have got some wriggle room to speculate about how many families would not take up the invitation... Two things did interest me: the first being that either someone is wizarding folk or they're not, and the second being that there _is_ a wizarding gene, which unfortunately detracts from some of the equally elegant theories of what governs wizard numbers and where the Hogwarts line is drawn. Cheers Ffred O Benryn wleth hyd Luch Reon Cymru yn unfryd gerhyd Wrion Gwret dy Cymry yghymeiri From imamommy at sbcglobal.net Sat Dec 11 22:38:07 2004 From: imamommy at sbcglobal.net (imamommy at sbcglobal.net) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 22:38:07 -0000 Subject: WW communications (was Jo's site etc) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119746 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Arya" wrote: > > Carolyn wrote: > I've never decided whether we have found out what Jo was referring to > in this interview quote about WW communications: > > Q. Has Harry ever used the Internet? > A. No. He's not allowed near Dudley's computer and Dudley's the only > one who's got a computer. He gets beaten up if he goes too near the > keyboard. So no, he's never used the Internet. I use it a lot but > not Harry. Wizards don't really need to use the Internet but that's > something that you'll find out later on in the series. They have a > means of finding out what goes on in the outside world that I think > is more fun than the Internet. Could anything be more fun than the > Internet? Yes! > > > Variously, it's been suggested that it's the portraits, or mirrors, > or travel devices such as the Floo network and portkeys. Or magical > books, rather like Riddle's diary, where you can literally lose > yourself in the pages (shades of Jasper Fforde). Maybe she meant Gred > & Forge's extendable ears ? > > But none of these things seem to quite fit, IMO. She seems to be > indicating something which you can search for news and information. > The closest thing I can think of that we have seen so far is a > crystal ball. > ----------------- > > Carolyn, I'm wondering when this quote is from? Specifically, I'm wondering if it's before > the publishment of GoF as that is when, IIRC, Floo as a means of mere communication is > first introduced. I think I've leaned towards thinking it is the Floo Network. I even think I > might have read an idea (or a fanfic) where someone proposed the Floo could be used like > a television of sorts (to get a view in on a Quidditch game for example). Of course I'd say > that sounds inefficient as the Floo is a main thru-way for travel and probably shouldn't be > blocked up for mere entertainment. > > > Arya imamommy: Not only that, but imagine kneeling on the floor for an entire Quidditch match? I was really hoping that we would find out what she was referring to in OoP. The closest thing I can come up with is Hermione's brain;-P But I also remember that the story is set in the mid-nineties, and the internet then was not nearly as useful then, or as widely used. Perhaps it was something that, when JKR began writing her story, did not need to be adressed, but is now sort of puzzling. imamommy who thinks Hermione would really benefit from something to save her searching all those books one at a time From foxmoth at qnet.com Sat Dec 11 22:41:37 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 22:41:37 -0000 Subject: JKR's cryptic answer: Who sent the Lestranges to the Longbottoms? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119747 > Pippin: > No, I think the purpose of the attack on the Longbottoms was as given, to get information on where Voldemort was, by someone who could not go looking personally or ask himself. "Chained these twelve years"...and if it's not Peter, well, it has to be Lupin, doesn't it? > > Jen: I hate to say it, but that thought crossed my mind. (ESE!Lupin is like the proverbial faucet drip, drip, dripping until you finally crack ). > > OK, I don't really think it's Lupin. But it's odd we never hear > about Voldemort's second in command. I do think there's evidence for Lucius. Like you said, Pippin, Voldemort accuses him of doing nothing to help him return; that's what you'd expect a second in command to do. > > > Alla: > > Don't give in, Jen, don't give in.:o) > > Personally, I am alsmost positive that it was Lucius. Sure, Voldemort accuses him of doing nothing, but at that point in time (at the graveyard), Voldie does not really have time to chat with Lucius or just Legilimenc him.< Pippin: Voldemort has been in contact with young Barty for months, though, so he would know whatever Barty knows. I'm almost positive it wasn't Lucius -- what's the point of keeping that secret? > Jen: > > The only other possibilty is one of the Order members who was 'presumed dead'. In JKR's world, presumed dead means you're up to something funny. Maybe Caradoc Dearborn will surface as the mysterious second in command ;)? Pippin: There wouldn't be much artistry in that. The character has to be featured in some way, so that we can kick ourselves for overlooking him. > Alla: > > True, very true. OR it WAS Snape who at that point in time did not deflect yet and decided to figure out what happened to his master. Isn't it a nice gult burden to carrY? :o) (No, I don't really believe that, but I think it is possible too)< Pippin: Dumbledore says Snape defected before the fall of Voldemort, and the attack on the Longbottoms happened afterward, so not possible, unless Dumbledore is lying. I think more likely Snape was involved in rescuing Neville, and Neville was memory charmed to forget. But he still has a subconscious memory of Snape drawing his wand. Pippin From carolynwhite2 at aol.com Sat Dec 11 22:54:14 2004 From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (carolynwhite2) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 22:54:14 -0000 Subject: WW communications (was Jo's site etc) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119748 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Arya" wrote: > Carolyn wrote: > I've never decided whether we have found out what Jo was referring to in this interview quote about WW communications: > A: Wizards don't really need to use the Internet but that's > something that you'll find out later on in the series. They have a > means of finding out what goes on in the outside world that I think > is more fun than the Internet. Could anything be more fun than the > Internet? Yes! > Arya: > Carolyn, I'm wondering when this quote is from? Specifically, I'm wondering if it's before the publishment of GoF as that is when, IIRC, Floo as a means of mere communication is first introduced. I think I've leaned towards thinking it is the Floo Network. I even think I might have read an idea (or a fanfic) where someone proposed the Floo could be used like a television of sorts (to get a view in on a Quidditch game for example). Of course I'd say that sounds inefficient as the Floo is a main thru-way for travel and probably shouldn't be blocked up for mere entertainment. > Hi Arya According to QuickQuill, the quote is from a Raincoast Books interview, dated March 2001 - that is, the year after GOF was published. So it seems she was referring to something that would turn up in OoP or a later book. I also wondered if it meant occlumency/legilimency, but that's not a common skill, and also a bit hit and miss for finding things out, and is certainly not much fun! So, crystal ball gazing was my next thought. But [two-way] mirrors could be it as well - and we have had that hint in OoP, with the present Sirius gave Harry. I like the Floo-based entertainment channel idea, but a problem, surely, is that you wouldn't get much of a view of a normal quidditch match peering out of a fireplace ? Carolyn From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat Dec 11 22:54:21 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 22:54:21 -0000 Subject: JKR's cryptic answer: Who sent the Lestranges to the Longbottoms? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119749 Alla: Don't give in, Jen, don't give in.:o) Personally, I am alsmost positive that it was Lucius. Sure, Voldemort accuses him of doing nothing, but at that point in time (at the graveyard), Voldie does not really have time to chat with Lucius or just Legilimenc him.< Pippin: Voldemort has been in contact with young Barty for months, though, so he would know whatever Barty knows. I'm almost positive it wasn't Lucius -- what's the point of keeping that secret? Alla: How would Barty Jr. know if it was Lucius? He may not have known the person who gave the order. In any event Lucius seems more plausible candidate (in my opinion only, of course) than he who must not be named (I don't mean Voldemort :o)) Jen: The only other possibilty is one of the Order members who was 'presumed dead'. In JKR's world, presumed dead means you're up to something funny. Maybe Caradoc Dearborn will surface as the mysterious second in command ;)? Pippin: There wouldn't be much artistry in that. The character has to be featured in some way, so that we can kick ourselves for overlooking him. Alla: The character does not have to feature PROMINENTLY, he can be just mentioned in passing. It will be enough for me to kick myself. :o) Pippin: Dumbledore says Snape defected before the fall of Voldemort, and the attack on the Longbottoms happened afterward, so not possible, unless Dumbledore is lying. I think more likely Snape was involved in rescuing Neville, and Neville was memory charmed to forget. But he still has a subconscious memory of Snape drawing his wand. Alla: Forgive me, but I don't remember the quote of the top of my head when Dumbledore directly mentioned that Snape deflected before Voldemort's fall. Can you give it to me, please? Do you mean Dumbledore testifying on Snape's behalf or something else? By the way, I 'll let you on a secret, Pippin. I also think it is entirely possible that Snape was sent to rescue Neville. But since I like my Snape to be overburden with guilt, I like to imagine this possibility more. :) Alla From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Sat Dec 11 20:22:48 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 12:22:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Wizards, Muggles, and Genetics (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041211202248.71393.qmail@web53103.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119750 > Maddy wrote: > If we let "M" and "m" represent the alleles for > magic (M) and > non-magic (m), with "M" being dominant and "m" being > recessive... > > mm = the genotype of a muggle or a squib > Mm, MM = the genotype of a witch or wizard > > mm X mm = mm (Two muggles or squibs will only end up > producing > non-magic children) > > Where as: > Mm x MM = Mm, MM > MM x MM = MM > Mm x Mm = MM, Mm, mm > (Witches and wizards almost always produce magical > children.) > > With that I would think that Squibs would be a bit > more common...and > how do muggles with "mm" recessive magic genes > spontaneously produce > "Mm" or "MM" magic children? > > Unless it's possible to carry the magic gene, but > not be dominant, > then I can't figure out how it would happen. Are > there any other > biologists here with better knowledge of genetics to > shed some light > on this? > Juli: I'm not much of a genetist either but I do know a little about the genetics of disease. Let's say Wizardness is a disease just like Parkison's, Alzheimer or Diabetes. All this deseases and many more have something in common: they are all inherited, but not every generation needs to show or manifest the disease, they are what's call Poligenic diseases, which means several factors combine to get the disease. Now back to Wizards: wizards seem to have a dominant gene (M im Maddy's exemple) which means it will always show itself (all kids will be wizards), but if both parents have a rececive gene (m), there's a 25% chance that the childrens are born Squibs. Muggle borns are much more complicated: since neither parent must have the M gene (this would mean either parent is a wizard), there must be some spontanous mutation, just like Darwin showed us (remember the theory of evolution). Or in muggles families the wizarding gene could act as a recesive allele, therefore two parents both with the rececive gene (m) for wizards have a 25% chance of a wizard ofspring. But most likely it acts as a poligenic inheritance (as mentioned above) where several factores (the enviroment, genetics, culture...) combine for the wizardness to show itself. Juli, hoping this will be easy to understand From lea_petra at myway.com Sat Dec 11 21:06:05 2004 From: lea_petra at myway.com (mari) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 16:06:05 -0500 (EST) Subject: the man with the hearing trumpet Message-ID: <20041211210605.BA07012CF1@mprdmxin.myway.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119751 Mari My son is re-reading OOP, while I am rereading GOF. Together we made an interesting discovery. You first hear of Broderick Bode in GOF as Arthur is pointing our members of the Ministry to the children, at the World Cup, but only by his last name. In OOP at St. Mungo's, when they are going to see Arthur. "A very old, stooped wizard with a hearing trumpet had shuffled to the front of the queue now. "I'm here to see Broderick Bode!" he Wheezed." The next day the children are sitting in the same room as that Bode is residing in. They don't recognize him (not surprsingly since they only saw Bode in passing the year before, plus they are dealing with Lockhart.). Later in the book, when Bode's death is announced, the children put it together. My son wondered if the old man was actually sent to find out where they were keeping Bode. Or could have been the killer. The plant got on the ward, without anyone seeing it, except the main healer of the ward? That is a little odd. Of course it did strike me that most of the staff was either too busy, or too dismissive to realy notice little things. So this is my son's theroy (which got me thinking.) The old man was a decoy sent to either drop off the plant or to find out where to send the plant. Good possiblity that it might have been someone in disguise. From antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com Sun Dec 12 00:00:06 2004 From: antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com (antoshachekhonte) Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 00:00:06 -0000 Subject: SHIP Calculus--JKR site spoiler Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119752 I'll indulge my inner adolescent here. I'm not a shipper, per se, but I've always felt that the romantic subplot(s) of the series were important and only likely to become more so as the characters mature. Also, I write fic from time to time, and so the question of attachments has played through my head. So JKR's announcement that another potential ship is off of the table made me think.... Okay, so Luna/Neville is no longer possible. Too bad. I actually hadn't thought about them much, but they would have been cute. JKR's right though--some of Luna's wilder ideas would probably scare the pants off of Harry. Where does that leave us? Out of all the possible pairings, the loss of one can't be too big a deal, right? Well, I'm going to posit some assumptions, and we'll see how big a deal it is. First of all, my assumption since OotP came out has been that--should they live--the Trio will become attached to the secondary trio who became so important during the course of that book: Ginny, Neville and Luna. I realize this isn't necessarily the case, but there are a number of reasons to believe it is so--all three of the secondary trio members have, at some point, expressed a clear interest in one of the members of the Trio--Ginny for Harry (obviously), Luna for Ron and--more subtly--Neville for Hermione (he also asked Ginny to the Yule Ball). So, let's accept that for now as a working hypothesis. Okay, okay, so Theo Nott or Susan Bones or any one of hundreds of other characters may make this all moot. Go with me here. There are a number of pairings we can fairly safely eliminate. Ginny/Ron is pretty clearly never going to happen. And, as much as it would make me happy to have homosexuality treated with some respect, and while JKR is clearly a broadminded person, I really don't see any canon slashing going on. So no Ron/Harry, Ron/Neville or Neville/Harry, Hermione/Ginny, Hermione/Luna (hee!) or Luna/Ginny. Likewise no threesomes, foursomes or sixsomes outside of fanon. ^.^ So what have we got left? If Hermione ends up with Ron, the others will sort themselves out Ginny/Neville and Luna/ Harry. If Hermione ends up with Harry, then we get Luna/Ron and Ginny/Neville. If Hermione ends up with Neville, then we have Luna/Ron and Ginny/Harry. That's it. No other options. Of course, they might play musical chairs over the course of books 6 and 7. And they may (as I said) pair up with others. And one or more may die. Still. Gives one pause, doesn't it? From moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com Sun Dec 12 00:26:53 2004 From: moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com (K G) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 16:26:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: JKR's cryptic answer: Who sent the Lestranges to the Longbottoms? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041212002653.67457.qmail@web53501.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119753 Alla: Forgive me, but I don't remember the quote of the top of my head when Dumbledore directly mentioned that Snape deflected before Voldemort's fall. Can you give it to me, please? Do you mean Dumbledore testifying on Snape's behalf or something else? IIRC, the scene is in GoF in the Pensive scene when Karkarof is giving names. The statement was made that DD had already given his evidence for Snape. I do not have my books here. Was it then or was it in another scene that DD makes the statement that he came back and confessed to DD before LV's fall and that is why he was believed? It had to be in GoF or OotP. The more I think about it the more I think it had to be the pensive scene because IIRC, every time DD is asked about Snape, DD says that it is between himself and Snape. moonmyyst --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com Sun Dec 12 01:10:01 2004 From: spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com (dungrollin) Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 01:10:01 -0000 Subject: Wizards, Muggles, and Genetics (long and obsessive) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119754 Dungrollin wrote: > So if the magic gene is dominant, then for Lily to have been a > witch, at least one of her parents must have had at least one > copy of the magic gene. That would make one of her parents > magic/muggle or magic/magic ??" ie, a witch or a wizard. Geddit?) > > Amber replied: > Not necessarily. You're forgetting how genetic variation > happens. Genes can mutate into original forms (there was no one > afflicted with hemophilia in the royal families of Europe before > Queen Victoria's children) Muggleborns are not mutants, as a quick calculation will show: The human genome is 3 billion base pairs long. (Base pairs are the things that are linked together to make DNA, and are what change in a mutation). Lets be wildly optimistic and say that it takes only one base pair change (mutation) to turn a muggle into a wizard, okay? Birth rate in 1980 was 13.5 per 1,000 population. The population in the UK was around 55 million, and there is on average 1 base pair mutation per generation ? i.e. there is one base pair difference between you and your parents *which is due to mutation*. Right. Some quick maths... (55,000,000 / 1,000) x 13.5 = 742,500 children born in the UK in 1980, each of which had a 1 in 3 billion chance of having the right mutation to make them a wizard. Therefore the number of wizards born to muggle parents in 1980 should have been around 742,000 / 3,000,000,000 = 0.00025. Therefore, I can confidently say, that if muggleborns are the result of mutations, you would get (in the UK if the population stayed static) on average, one muggleborn wizard every 4,000 years. Convinced?* Amber continued: ... and some genes can negate the indications of other genes (some children are born with the predisposition to cystic fibrosis and do not develop the disease due to other gene combinations--evolution at work). All this only reinforces how rare muggle-born (25% or less of the wizarding population) and squibs are. Dungrollin again: That's more possible... Postulate one gene for muggleness/wizardry and another gene for a suppressor/expressor. The active suppressor allele would have to be recessive (to allow JKRs statement that 'magic is dominant') - but if you've got a large enough Muggle population (which we have) with, say, a very low frequency of the dominant allele which allows the magic gene to be expressed then... Well, you could have loads of wizarding genes in the Muggle population, but it's only when they happen to be born into a body carrying the dominant expressor gene that the child ends up being magical. Oh god. Gene frequencies means we're straying into the realms of population genetics, which frankly makes me want to go to the pub and pretend I didn't suggest it. But since JKR has brought genetics into it all, shouldn't we all be wizards by now? Magical genes seem to me to possess huge selective advantages over Muggle genes, they should have out-bred us yonks ago. Dungrollin Thanking Charme very much for bringing up a subject that I can obsess over, but gracefully bowing out now... * Have I got that right? Or is it one mutation per generation in introns (coding DNA)? - If I'm wrong then the chance is not 1 in 3 billion, but 1 in 72 million which means... 742,000 / 72,000,000 = 0.01 (1 muggleborn every 100 years - still too low, anyway). From rsteph1981 at yahoo.com Sun Dec 12 01:59:53 2004 From: rsteph1981 at yahoo.com (Rebecca Stephens) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 17:59:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] JKR's cryptic answer: Who sent the Lestranges to the Longbottoms? In-Reply-To: <20041211214814.7394.qmail@web53505.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041212015953.93460.qmail@web20025.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119755 > Spoiler here for anyone not reading JKR updates! > * > * > * > * > * > * > * > * > * > * > * > Rumours Section: > > Q: The Lestanges were sent after Neville to kill > him. > > JKR: "No, they weren't, they were very definitely > sent after > Neville's parents. I can't say too much about this > because it > touches too closely on the prophecy and how many > people knew about > it, but the Lestranges were not in on the secret." > > > Jen: > > > I'm stumped on this one. Most of the DE's were > trying to talk their > way out of Azkaban about this time, yet the > Lestranges and at least > one superior were still carrying out a secret > operation. > Okay, I haven't actually read the update. But I don't understand exactly why this drawing so much attention. I mean, I get the part about Neville & the prophecy and wondering the significance of her mentioning it (and possible the significance of them not knowing). But what she says here just seems to back up what is in the book to me: they did not go there to kill Neville. They went there because Frank was an auror of renown and they thought he might know what happened to Voldemort and tried to torture it out of him. Rebecca ===== http://wychlaran.tripod.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From mysticowl at gmail.com Sun Dec 12 02:09:49 2004 From: mysticowl at gmail.com (Alina) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 21:09:49 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] website SPOILERS . Who goes to Hogwarts In-Reply-To: <002301c4dfd2$0b21b0a0$704b6d51@f3b7j4> References: <1102741695.16852.74476.m24@yahoogroups.com> <002301c4dfd2$0b21b0a0$704b6d51@f3b7j4> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119756 What really interests me on this point is how many muggle families decide not to let their kids go to Hogwarts? Or maybe the better question: how many muggle families do? Because the question of money and tuition aside, muggle parents IMO are more likely to decide against Hogwarts than wizarding ones. I can't imagine there would be many willing to send their kids to a boarding school they didn't even know existed and one they cannot inspect for themselves. And then, what happened to such kids? Do they go through life with glass exploding around them when they're angry and other unexplainable things happening and just shrugging it off? It makes me think of Terry Goodkind's Sword Of Truth series (of which I only read a couple of books) where wizards who weren't trained to use their power were in danger of dying. Actually, it works similarly in Robert Jordan's Wheel Of Time (similarities between SoT and WoT? Wow, you don't say). So I wonder what is JKR's take on it. We do know that magic manifests itself through subconscious desires whether or not the person knows they're magical, but from what we've seen in book one it not only doesn't threaten the witch or wizard's life, it usually acts to save it. One last question: if a muggle-born was not sent to Hogwarts, but upon becoming an adult made a conscious choice to live in the wizarding rather than muggle world, would they be able to? I wonder what are the chances of JKR ever answering any of that... Alina. From mysticowl at gmail.com Sun Dec 12 02:13:49 2004 From: mysticowl at gmail.com (Alina) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 21:13:49 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Hermione's age and Ron's wand In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.0.20041211130007.04143008@pop.west.cox.net> References: <6.1.2.0.0.20041211130007.04143008@pop.west.cox.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119757 > Can someone please show me the interview where JKR says that Hermione > started earlier because she was clever, and/or is the youngest of the three? Actually, on the latest update on her website, JKR said that Hermione (whose birthday is in September) was 11, nearing her 12th birthday when she started Hogwarts. That would make her the oldest of the three, wouldn't it? Alina. From moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com Sun Dec 12 02:14:25 2004 From: moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com (K G) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 18:14:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] JKR's cryptic answer: Who sent the Lestranges to the Longbottoms? In-Reply-To: <20041212015953.93460.qmail@web20025.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041212021425.34427.qmail@web53507.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119758 Rebecca Stephens wrote: > Spoiler here for anyone not reading JKR updates! > * > * > * > * > * > * > * > * > * > * > * > Rumours Section: > > Q: The Lestanges were sent after Neville to kill > him. > > JKR: "No, they weren't, they were very definitely > sent after > Neville's parents. I can't say too much about this > because it > touches too closely on the prophecy and how many > people knew about > it, but the Lestranges were not in on the secret." > > > Jen: > > > I'm stumped on this one. Most of the DE's were > trying to talk their > way out of Azkaban about this time, yet the > Lestranges and at least > one superior were still carrying out a secret > operation. > Okay, I haven't actually read the update. But I don't understand exactly why this drawing so much attention. I mean, I get the part about Neville & the prophecy and wondering the significance of her mentioning it (and possible the significance of them not knowing). But what she says here just seems to back up what is in the book to me: they did not go there to kill Neville. They went there because Frank was an auror of renown and they thought he might know what happened to Voldemort and tried to torture it out of him. Rebecca JKR: "No, they weren't, they were very definitely *sent after* Neville's parents. I can't say too much about this because it touches too closely on the prophecy and *how many people knew about it*, but the Lestranges were *not in on the secret*." the emphasis here is mine. there are several clues in what JKR had to say. these are the clues that I saw. first of all, the LeStranges did not just go on their own to find out what happened to LV. they were sent. *Who sent them?* next she talks about the people who knew about the prophecy. Canon states that DD knew, the person who listened at the door knew half of it and LV knew the half that the person who listened knew. *Who was it?* *Who else knew?* and we also know that of the people who knew all or part of the prophecy, the LeStranges were not in on it so did not know the link with the Potters and the Longbottoms. *Why, then, if they did not know the link, did they go to the Longbottoms and torture them?* I hope this helps you to understand why we are so interested in this statement. JKR has a way of stating things. She can twist and hide little hints in the middle of a bunch of rubbish. moonmyyst --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Find what you need with new enhanced search. Learn more. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com Sun Dec 12 02:21:08 2004 From: moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com (K G) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 18:21:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] website SPOILERS . Who goes to Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041212022108.25265.qmail@web53502.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119759 Alina wrote: What really interests me on this point is how many muggle families decide not to let their kids go to Hogwarts? Or maybe the better question: how many muggle families do? Because the question of money and tuition aside, muggle parents IMO are more likely to decide against Hogwarts than wizarding ones. I can't imagine there would be many willing to send their kids to a boarding school they didn't even know existed and one they cannot inspect for themselves. And then, what happened to such kids? Do they go through life with glass exploding around them when they're angry and other unexplainable things happening and just shrugging it off? It makes me think of Terry Goodkind's Sword Of Truth series (of which I only read a couple of books) where wizards who weren't trained to use their power were in danger of dying. Actually, it works similarly in Robert Jordan's Wheel Of Time (similarities between SoT and WoT? Wow, you don't say). So I wonder what is JKR's take on it. We do know that magic manifests itself through subconscious desires whether or not the person knows they're magical, but from what we've seen in book one it not only doesn't threaten the witch or wizard's life, it usually acts to save it. One last question: if a muggle-born was not sent to Hogwarts, but upon becoming an adult made a conscious choice to live in the wizarding rather than muggle world, would they be able to? I wonder what are the chances of JKR ever answering any of that... Alina. Here is a question that I came up with while reading your post.... with the restriction of underage magic, how do the kids that are homeschooled instead of going to Hogwarts learn magic? Or the kids that go straight into trade? They are still underage. moonmyyst __________________________________________________ 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 rsteph1981 at yahoo.com Sun Dec 12 02:30:29 2004 From: rsteph1981 at yahoo.com (Rebecca Stephens) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 18:30:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Hermione's age and Ron's wand In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041212023029.41870.qmail@web20026.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119760 --- Alina wrote: > > > Can someone please show me the interview where JKR > says that Hermione > > started earlier because she was clever, and/or is > the youngest of the three? > > Actually, on the latest update on her website, JKR > said that Hermione > (whose birthday is in September) was 11, nearing her > 12th birthday > when she started Hogwarts. That would make her the > oldest of the > three, wouldn't it? > > > Alina. > Yes, but people are saying that before this website update, JKR said Hermione is youngest. I belive this comes from the timeline on the COS dvd. Rebecca ===== http://wychlaran.tripod.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From siskiou at vcem.com Sun Dec 12 02:57:46 2004 From: siskiou at vcem.com (Susanne) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 18:57:46 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Hermione's age and Ron's wand In-Reply-To: <20041212023029.41870.qmail@web20026.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041212023029.41870.qmail@web20026.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1585415914.20041211185746@vcem.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119761 Hi, Saturday, December 11, 2004, 6:30:29 PM, Rebecca wrote: > Yes, but people are saying that before this website > update, JKR said Hermione is youngest. I belive this > comes from the timeline on the COS dvd. I don't think she ever outright said Hermione was the youngest. People assumed it, since JKR approved the dvd timeline (CoS dvd, I think) and thought she realized the implications regarding Hermione's age. Looking at her frequent trouble with numbers, it's not too surprising to find out Hermione is really the oldest. -- Best regards, Susanne mailto:siskiou at vcem.com From mysticowl at gmail.com Sun Dec 12 03:25:43 2004 From: mysticowl at gmail.com (Alina) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 22:25:43 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] website SPOILERS . Who goes to Hogwarts In-Reply-To: <20041212022108.25265.qmail@web53502.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041212022108.25265.qmail@web53502.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119762 > Here is a question that I came up with while reading your post.... with the restriction of underage magic, how do the kids that are homeschooled instead of going to Hogwarts learn magic? Or the kids that go straight into trade? They are still underage. > > moonmyyst > Well, it is possible that the restrictions only applies to those who go to school. Possibly, it works like this: homeschooled kids are allowed to do magic at the time when a term is in progress in school (in other words, they can't do it during the Summer), while apprenticed kids are registered with the ministry so it knows not to be alerted to their magic use. Since that information doesn't apply to Harry or anyone he knows, it's not surprising no one would expand on the Underage Magic Act when talking about it to him. Alina. From dfrankiswork at netscape.net Sun Dec 12 03:47:21 2004 From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (davewitley) Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 03:47:21 -0000 Subject: Hermione's age and Ron's wand In-Reply-To: <1585415914.20041211185746@vcem.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119763 Susanne wrote: > I don't think she ever outright said Hermione was the > youngest. > > People assumed it, since JKR approved the dvd timeline (CoS > dvd, I think) and thought she realized the implications > regarding Hermione's age. I think part of the trouble here is what is meant by 'approval'. In my book, approval means that WB showed her the timeline and asked if she had any objection to its publication in that form. It doesn't mean that she necessarily agreed with anything in it - just that she didn't mind WB putting it out. It's not as if she's saying it's *her* timeline. I put it on a par with her being happy with films which portray Harry with blue eyes. David From dk59us at yahoo.com Sun Dec 12 03:59:59 2004 From: dk59us at yahoo.com (Eustace_Scrubb) Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 03:59:59 -0000 Subject: What Mrs. Figg saw (was Re: Dudders and the Dementors) In-Reply-To: <20041211214130.30126.qmail@web53504.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119764 Eustace_Scrubb began with this entirely unwarranted speculation: > Now, I wonder, did Mrs. Figg ever live in a place called Godric's > Hollow? > Moonmyyst responded: > hhhmmmm..... Harry's old nurse maid? hhhhmmmm..... could prove interesting!!!! Eustace_Scrubb continued: Well, maybe, or maybe just the Potters' batty old neighbor across the way. At the end of GoF, when Dumbledore is reactivating the order, he does refer to Arabella Figg as part of the "old gang," right? We've discovered her role in Little Whinging before and during the time of the second Order, but we don't yet know what she did in the first. And there's always the question about how Dumbledore was informed of the attack on the Potters, who else was there on either side, etc. Perhaps it was Mrs. Figg... Cheers, Eustace_Scrubb From dk59us at yahoo.com Sun Dec 12 04:23:53 2004 From: dk59us at yahoo.com (Eustace_Scrubb) Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 04:23:53 -0000 Subject: JKR's cryptic answer: Who sent the Lestranges to the Longbottoms? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119765 Eustace Scrubb: > > What if the Lestrange cell was following contingency orders given > > by Voldemort himself? (Go after the Longbottoms if the Potter > > operation is successful but you haven't heard from me in 24 > > hours?) Since the Potters were killed, and the DEs did not know > > about the prophecy, they'd be likely to suspect the Longbottoms > > had something to do with LV's disappearance anyway. > Jen: > I'm wondering whether the attacks happened so quickly after LV > disappeared. In GOF we find out from Dumbledore the attacks > occurred "after Voldemort's fall from power, just when everyone > thought they were safe." (US, chap. 30, p. 603). That's a little > ambiguous--did people feel safe the minute they learned he was > defeated, i.e. the opening scenes of PS/SS, or does the 'fall from > power' include the DE's coming forward and/or being arrested? Eustace_Scrubb: Well, I agree that's the 64 million euro question. When did people feel "safe"? While I don't necessarily feel it's logical, I'm in the camp (it may be a camp of one!) that thinks the partying behavior immediately after Godric's Hollow (disapproved of by McGonnagall but tacitly blessed by Dumbledore) indicates the wizarding world felt safe early on. I think Magda's interesting theory (Message 119708) depends on what JKR said she didn't want to give away...how many people knew about the prophecy. For it to work, I think Lucius Malfoy had to know...but I also doubt that Bellatrix would willingly follow Lucius' leadership. So he would have had to hoodwink her into the scheme. Then her 14 or 15 year term in Azkaban wasn't a noble sacrifice to find her master, but essentially an unwitting sacrifice for Lucius Malfoy's political ends. If that's true and she learns the truth, I wouldn't want to hang around Malfoy Manor without a lot of protection. (Maybe this is why Draco's taking a detour?) Hell hath no fury like a true believer sold out. [another caveat: I haven't read the Red Hen article, and I'm already up past my bedtime, so I'll hope once again that they haven't neatly answered my concerns already.] Cheers, Eustace_Scrubb From annemehr at yahoo.com Sun Dec 12 04:36:28 2004 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 04:36:28 -0000 Subject: SHIP Calculus--JKR site spoiler In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119766 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "antoshachekhonte" wrote: > > I'll indulge my inner adolescent here. I'm not a shipper, per se, but I've always felt that the > romantic subplot(s) of the series were important and only likely to become more so as the > characters mature. Annemehr: Yes, shipping. I like to do mine lazily, on whatever craft catches my fancy at the moment, lounging in a deck chair and holding a drink with a little umbrella sticking out. I rarely, if ever, man the can(n)ons. But what's life without a little cruise -- er, romance? > So what have we got left? > > If Hermione ends up with Ron, the others will sort themselves out Ginny/Neville and Luna/ > Harry. > > If Hermione ends up with Harry, then we get Luna/Ron and Ginny/Neville. > > If Hermione ends up with Neville, then we have Luna/Ron and Ginny/Harry. > > That's it. No other options. > > Of course, they might play musical chairs over the course of books 6 and 7. And they may > (as I said) pair up with others. And one or more may die. > > Still. Gives one pause, doesn't it? For symmetry's sake, I like Hermione/Neville, Luna/Ron and Harry/Ginny. It pairs a primary member with a secondary member and avoids shipping within the trio, which leaves HRH free to remain, always, *friends.* I like their friendship just as it is and see no need to mess with it. Unless JKR makes me, of course. My sentimental choice is the one with Luna/Harry. It's a ship I've always thought would go well. But also, Harry is so relaxed and comfortable with Hermione now, and I'd hate to see him get all nervous around her as a suitor, just when he's going to need her help during the war. And, yes he probably would get nervous; that'd be him all over. Ron/Hermione, on the other hand, would probably just leave Harry bemused, especially if they quit carping at each other. Shipping within the Sextet -- quite a fleet you've got going, and yes, there's a storm brewing... Annemehr From slgazit at sbcglobal.net Sun Dec 12 05:28:39 2004 From: slgazit at sbcglobal.net (slgazit) Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 05:28:39 -0000 Subject: Hermione's age and Ron's wand In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119767 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "davewitley" wrote: > I put it on a par with her being happy with films which portray > Harry with blue eyes. She had no choice if she wanted Daniel Radcliff (sp?) for the role. I remember seeing on a website once a comment that he had an allergy for the colored lenses they tried to use on him. Salit From snow15145 at yahoo.com Sun Dec 12 05:29:51 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 05:29:51 -0000 Subject: JKR's cryptic answer: Who sent the Lestranges to the Longbottoms? In-Reply-To: <20041212015953.93460.qmail@web20025.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119768 I'll try again with a thought I had in a post some months ago, pertaining to this subject, that Harry was left with the Longbottoms for safe keeping during the missing twenty-four hours, which led the remaining death-eaters definite cause to investigate. Where else would Harry be safe and well taken care of, after his parent's death, but an Aurors house, who by the way just had a child themselves that knew Harry's parents being in the Order together. Dumbledore surely wasn't babysitting and neither was McGonnagall, Hagrid-that's a laugh, he's lucky if he could take care of his forbidden creatures. Dumbledore was busy making packs with living relatives to Harry. Hagrid was instructed to take Harry to the Longbottoms. Everything went flawlessly that day into the night but someone knew the whereabouts of the child that brought down their Master, Voldemort. The people protecting this child, who disposed of their Master, surely would know something? {Everyone was aware of the fact that this child lived from Voldemort's attack, not even a day after it happened (Harry hadn't even been delivered to the Dursley's yet) wizards were all out celebrating the fact that they knew Harry lived and Voldemort was gone. Everyone felt safe from Voldemort but they forgot about his loyal followers, when they were parading in front of muggles, the traces of Voldemort were like the reason "We" are still in Iraq! Just because the leader is gone the subjects to his cause are still out there. Yet initially they all felt safe, Voldemort (Sadam) was beaten; he was gone, cause for great celebration and relaxation.} Someone in the ranks of Voldemort knew that Harry, the resilient child, had been taken to the Longbottoms for protection after the incident at Godric's Hollow. It would have, however, been assumable to Voldemort's mates that anyone who had been given such a high priority task (as to take care of the child that destroyed Voldemort) would also know some circumstances of the whereabouts of the victim. The Longbottoms surely would have been privy to information of what had happened to their Master, right? No, they weren't, which was ingenious of the General in charge, Dumbledore. (It's rough being a General) Lucius looks too obvious of a suspect to inform the death-eater troops of his findings of information on Harry but he is of course suspect. I'm not quite certain who I would attribute the "Harry whereabouts" to be, but it is extremely doubtful, if not impossible that it was Snape. I still maintain that someone knew that Harry was at the Longbottoms for protection, as well as comfort, and the second-hand man to Voldemort sent Bella and Co. to find the information, that wasn't there, but Cruciatus (crucified) them to insanity. Snow From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Sun Dec 12 00:45:55 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 16:45:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: JKR's cryptic answer: Who sent the Lestranges to the Longbottoms? In-Reply-To: <20041212002653.67457.qmail@web53501.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041212004555.80309.qmail@web53105.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119769 > Alla: > > Forgive me, but I don't remember the quote of the > top of my head when Dumbledore directly mentioned > that Snape deflected before Voldemort's fall. Can > you give it to me, please? > > Do you mean Dumbledore testifying on Snape's behalf > or something else? Juli: Here's the quote, OoP Ch 30 "The Pensieve" "Snape!" he [Karkaroff] shouted. "Severus Snape!" "Snape has been cleared by this council," said Crouch disdainfully. "He has been vouched for by Albus Dumbledore." "No!" shouted Karkaroff, straining at the chains that 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." From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Sun Dec 12 00:47:42 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 16:47:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: Correction Message-ID: <20041212004742.1567.qmail@web53107.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119770 Just a little correction on my previous message, the quote isn't from Order of the Phoenix, it's from Goblet of Fire. Juli From slgazit at sbcglobal.net Sun Dec 12 05:50:34 2004 From: slgazit at sbcglobal.net (slgazit) Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 05:50:34 -0000 Subject: Hermione's age In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119771 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mcmaxslb" wrote: > > I think it is interesting that JKR makes Hermione the oldest of the > Trio(previously JKR said that she was the youngest)now that in the HP > world their ages have meaning. In HBP Hermione will turn seventeen > and the underage restrictions will no longer apply to her, but the > boys still are. I can see all sorts of interesting scenarios coming > from that. I think the apparation issue is why she had to make her the oldest member of the trio with a Sept. birthday. Based on GoF (Percy) and OoP (F&G) apparation tests only take place in the summer for those 17 and older - this makes sense as the test and practice time can only be done when away from school. Had Hermione been younger she'd not be legally able to apparate in her last year at Hogwarts, while her two friends could. Even though they can't apparate inside Hogwarts, I am fairly certain that apparation outside it will play an important role in book 7 and JKR could not exclude such an important member of the trio from it. An older Hermione also makes her character more believable in my opinion - she is so much more mature than the two boys, that it stretches credibility to believe she could be even younger than they (yes I know that girls are more mature than boys the same age but not that much...). Salit From impherring13 at yahoo.com Sun Dec 12 06:29:36 2004 From: impherring13 at yahoo.com (Dave) Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 06:29:36 -0000 Subject: Guarding the Stone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119772 Barry Arrowsmith: >>>It's many hours later that they go through the trapdoor - yet when DD is oozing concern over Harry he intimates that all those hours were taken up with getting to London and back. Yeah, sure.>>> imamommy: >>>Well, how long does it take to get to London and back by thestral? It could be several hours. Hagrid mentions that DD sometimes takes them for trips.>>> Now SD: Sorry, I don't believe the trip can take hours. Harry and various others fly from Hogwarts to London on thestrals in OOP. The way this is written/worded in that book leads me to believe this is a very short trip for thestrals. I believe (though I don't have my book on hand) it mentions something about them moving extremely fast. Add to this the fact that England really isn't that big from north to south (and even smaller from east to west). -SD From catlady at wicca.net Sun Dec 12 09:48:15 2004 From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)) Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 09:48:15 -0000 Subject: replies to Two Weeks of Posts, not even half the subjects will fit in this title Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119773 Sharon Azriona wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/118773 : << Not only that, but who paid [Tom Riddle's] school fees? We know that it's not exactly cheap to attend Hogwarts - I believe one of the Weasley kids mentions it in passing before or during a trip to Diagon Alley, and Molly hushes him quick. But Tom, being an orphan and not having much of his own - how does he pay for schooling? (Does Hogwarts have a scholarship program, maybe?) >> I think the scene to which you refer is in CoS, where the kids look at their assigned book list and see what appears to be the entire Lockhart ouevre and one of the Twins said, with concern: "This lot isn't going to come cheap." I believe that Hogwarts doesn't charge any school fees, as its Endowment has had a thousand years to grow and make the institution self-sustaining, but books and uniforms and school supplies still cost money. There *must* be some kind of scholarship or charity program for kids who can't afford those necessities, to which I imagine the Weasleys are too proud to apply. It might be supplying the very low income kids with thoroughly used uniforms and books and cauldrons and vials and wands and stuff that had been left behind by departing students who didn't need that old stuff anymore as they were going to get better ones. Maybe they are even supplied with leaky half (or less) full ink bottles, containers with just scraps of the required herb, and used parchment from which they must scrape the writing themselves ... it's such fun to imagine Tommy undergoing the humiliation of shaking dried nettles from the bottom of jars and boxes and bags into one container ... but they may have given him parchments whose old text was quite *educational*, about Dark Arts or such. Potioncat wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/118780 : << I'm still betting on a Scorpio birthday for Snape. Particularly with his sarcastic touch. >> Oh, I'm SURE that Snape is a Scorpio like me, but JKR doesn't believe in astrology and therefore the birthdays she has made up for the characters might be all wrong. Sharon Azriona wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/118801 : << (And for that matter - if Peter was the Secret Keeper - how'd Sirius know where to find James and Lily anyway? Are we assuming that the moment the spell was cast, Peter told Sirius where to find them?) >> Since the demonstration in OoP of how the Fidelius Charm works, I feel certain that Peter told The Secret to Sirius, so that maybe Sirius was even able to visit the Potters in hiding. Furthermore, I believe that he also told Dumbledore and Hagrid, which is how DD was able to tell Hagrid to go to the Potters' hiding place. Some people question how DD could have thought SB was the SK when PP told him, but OoP showed that The Secret can be 'told' in writing. Del wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGr ownups/message/118838 : << If he didn't trust DD enough to tell him about the SK switch, why would he trust him now ? And why didn't they trust DD to start with ? >> I never thought it was a matter of not trusting DD, but rather some combination of not wanting to put another burden on him and of the childish insistence on being independent: "I'd rather do it myself!" Del wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGr ownups/message/118922 : << Tell me : what *can* the Muggleborn wizards do in the Muggle world? I'm not talking holidays or shopping trips, I'm talking living in the MW, contributing to it. >> I don't know that it is required to *contribute* to the Muggle World in order to live in it -- I mean, *I* live in the Muggle World, and I'm not certain that I contribute anything to it. kjirstem wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/118924 : << I don't think the magic folk are confined to the WW precisely, but they are effectively cut off from the Muggle world. First, as Jim points out downthread, there is the requirement that the WW be kept secret from Muggles. Then, there is the very different education. Third, the WW uses a different monetary system. All three of these things are part of canon and all work to keep wizards and Muggles separate. (snip) For education, we have the Hogwarts curriculum. I don't think too many Muggle employers or universities would find it adequate. >> It is my perception that most people, most jobs, use NOTHING of what they learned in high school, college, and university. Me, for example, I make my living as a COBOL pgmmer. I learned no programming in school, dropped out of university, and have forgotten everything I learned in classes like French, Hebrew, Maths, History ... According to me, employers require the diplomas and degrees and transcripts showing 3.5 gpa merely to reduce the number of applications they have to wade through. I'm convinced that wizarding folk make better forgeries than us Muggles do, and can back up forged documents with a Confundus Spell cast on the university's computer as well as on people. Or, as others have suggested, they can get jobs that don't require degrees. Heidi Tandy has in the past asserted that many Muggle pop music 'one hit wonders' are wizards and witches who were trying out life in the Muggle World. And one possibility not available to most Muggles: an import/export business importing Muggle goods (like jeans and trainers) to the wizarding world. << They can exchange their money at Gringotts, but there is that barrier to easy commerce. >> Having to exchange dollars to ren den bi (yuan) to dollars doesn't seem to bother most of the (tiny, storefront) import/export businesses that my bus passes on Spring Street. Snow wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforG rownups/message/118932 : << Why do the 3rd year students need a permission form signed by their guardians to visit Hogsmeade but the children who were underage participants of the 2nd task in Goblet, i.e. Hermione, Gabrielle, Ron, did not need to inform their parents or have permission, wouldn't this task be more dangerous than Hogsmeade? >> As Meriaugust pointed out in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/118965 , we don't know that the four hostages DIDN'T have permission slips from their parents. It also occurs to me that the permission slips were required to leave campus, but the hostages didn't leave campus: the lake they were under is part of the campus. Carol wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/119037 : << He was Karkaroff's favorite boy, and we know what Karkaroff is or was. Is it safe to have Viktor on the good side? >> Surely Karkaroff liked Viktor only for his prospects of wealth and fame, not for his values or his personality. I mean, considering how much Viktor showed his dislike of Karkaroff. Juli wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforG rownups/message/119050 : << Phineas may not have been the best Headmaster (snip), but does it mean he was evil? No, why would the WW allow a evil dark lord to teach their offspring? >> For the same reason that the WW respected Lucius Malfoy so much until he was actually CAUGHT rioting in the Department of Mysteries. Many of the wizarding folk don't object to evil, only to getting caught. Finwitch wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/119058 : << Oh, and James' attack wasn't unwarned. That 'All right, Snivellus?' - I'd say it's a bit like: 'Is it all right with you that we fight so Sirius/Black/Padfoot won't be so bored? Practice for the practical DADA test, OK?' As SS went for his wand, he *accepted* the call for the fight/practice --- and er - if this was *practice* for DADA, well... >> Except that some Brits on list have assured us that "All right, soandso?" is a greeting, not a question. Here's a citation agreeing with them: http://www.peevish.co.uk/slang/a.htm "alright! Exclam. Hello. A greeting. No answer is expected to what is inherently a question. Northern dialect has created the phonetic corruption awreet." Oliver wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/119062 : << Lupin emotionally comforting the other characters. He's doing it with (snip) the werewolf in Arthur's cell >> I agree with all your other examples of dear Remus comforting people (when his own problems are as bad or worse and no one comforts him), but look at the context of this one (UK ed p 448): "Mrs Weasley did not seem entirely satisfied with Mr Weasley's answer. (snip) Mrs Weasley let out an ominous noise somewhere between a shriek and a snarl. Lupin strolled away from the bed and over to the werewolf, who had no visitors and was looking rather wistfully at the crowd around Mr Weasley. Bill muttered something about getting himself a cup of tea and Fred and George leapt up to accompany him grinning." Lupin was taking an excuse to get out of the way before the fight, same as Bill and the twins. The Trio did the same once the fight had started: "'It sounds as though you've been trying to sew you skin back togher,' said Mrs Weasley with a snort of mirthless laughter, 'but even you, Arthur, wouldn't be *that* stupid --' 'I fancy a cup of tea, too,' said Harry, jumping to his feet. Hermione, Ron, and Ginny almost sprinted to the door with him." And that is how they accidentally found Lockhart. Del wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGr ownups/message/119169 : << Ron showed anti-Giant discrimination >> I think Hagrid's description of his visit to the Giants and our sight of Grawp indicate that Ron's anti-Giant discrimination is simply accuracy. *sigh* It is unfair discrimination to say 'let's hire a boy to do math because girls are no good at math" but it is accuracy to say "let's hire a cat to climb trees because dogs are no good at climbing trees". Marianne wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/119238 : << "Coward" seems to be a hot-button word between Snape and Sirius, as evidenced by their confrontation in the kitchen in OoP. That scene struck me as laden with echoes of past battles between the two, where either or both accused the other of being a chicken. And, that tendency is still with them as the adults they supposedly are. >> Or maybe "coward" is just one of the WORST insults in the wizarding world. Long ago there were posts about the wizarding world being a "warrior society", compared to Livian Rome and to Iceland of the sagas, where courage, strength, and revenge are highly admired and weakness, even of a traumatized infant like young Neville, is despised rather than 'coddled'. Charme wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/119244 : << but also history around the creature classification denoted to elves, goblins, and centaurs >> << Add this to why statues of supposed *creatures* would appear in the MoM along with wizards who believe their races to be beneath them >> Humans and wizards are creatures, like other Beings, Beasts, Ghosts, and possibly autonomous gadgets (like the car freely roaming the Forbidden Forest). House Elves, Goblins, Giants, and Veelas are Beings, not Beasts, which is why they aren't in FANTASTIC BEASTS AND WHERE TO FIND THEM (one of the charity books). Page xii explains the definition adopted in 1811: "a being [is] any creature that has sufficient intelligence to understand the laws of the magical community and to bear part of the responsibility in shaping those laws." FB (page 6 and supra) says "Being intelligent and capable of speech, [the Centaur] should not strictly speaking be termed a beast, but by its own request it has been classified as such by the Ministry of Magic". Part of the responsibility in shaping those laws? Where are the House Elf and Giant representatives to the legislature, whatever part of the Ministry of Magic acts as legislature? Juli wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforG rownups/message/119314 : << it would be extermely funny to see a werewolf rat. Say Scrabbers (before we knew he was Pete), then BANG on a full moon night he turns into a full grown werewolf. >> I've always wondered, if a person was both werewolf and Animagus, if he/she took animal form before the moonrise, would being in Animagus form prevent the werewolf transformation, especially the mental effects? There may never have been a person who was both werewolf and Animagus to try it out. Kim wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGr ownups/message/119387 : << Remember too that there are wizards and witches that don't hold such negative attitudes towards Muggles -- I mean, how do you account for the enlightened attitudes of the pureblood Weasleys? >> Arthur Weasley has a good heart; he has good intentions. But he has racist attitudes toward Muggles (altho' apparently not to Muggleborns) by being so patronizing about them. I recall him saying something about "Bless their hearts, it's amazing the things Muggles come up with to survive without magic." Mari wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforG rownups/message/119407 : << My interpretation is that a Wizard is general a good person, a warlock is someone who is a little suspect. Same with Witch and Hag. >> In the Potterverse, witches are female magical humans while Hags are non-human magical Beings. FB, introduction, footnote 3: "The centaurs objected to some of the creatures with whom they were asked to share 'being' status, such as hags and vampires". If you remember Dumbledore's official Headmaster letterhead in PS/SS (hi, Vivamus!), his name was followed by "Order of Merlin, First Class, Grand Sorc., Chf. Warlock, Supreme Mugwump, International Confed. of Wizards". Chief Warlock was his title as chairman of the Wizengamot (hi, Sherrie!) There's a bit in OoP where Lupin says: "Dumbledore's 'been voted out of the Chairmanship of the International Confederation of Wizards... they've demoted him from *chief Warlock on the Wizengamot*... and they're talking about taking away his Order of Merlin, First Class, too.' (my emphasis) I long held that 'warlock' was a title meaning an elective representative to wizarding legislature council (so that the medieval Wizards' Council, precursor to the Ministry of Magic as we were told in the schoolbooks, could perfectly well be called the Warlocks' Council). I said, the Saxon meaning of "warlock = oath breaker" (hi, Valky!) would apply quite well to the wizarding equivalent of a Congressman or M.P. Now 'warlock' might more specially mean a member of the Wizengamot (or of the wizarding parliament, if they aren't the same thing). 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 Quidditch being called 'the noble sport of warlocks' (in QTTA); but public opinion of politicians being what it is, 'warlock' also came to mean a person full of hot air, which might explain why the narratorial voice refers to noisy groups at bars as 'warlocks'. While I was at it, I also proposed that the Wizards' Council was earlier named the Witchingameet, based on the name 'Witangamot' of the Saxon parliament before the Norman Conquest. Wizengamot clearly is named from the same source, so I patted myself on the back for an "almost right" prediction. (hey, Vivamus!) I think all the following names have appeared in canon, and I think they all mean the same organization.) International Federation of Wizards, pages 90 and 120 of UK OoP International Federation of Warlocks, pages 30 and 128 of UK OoP Fudge has been criticized by some members of the *International Federation of Warlocks* for informing the Muggle Prime Minister of the crisis. PoA International Confederation of Wizards, on DD's letterhead in SS and GoF ch.17 International Confederation of Warlocks' Statute of Secrecy in Mafalda Hopkirk's letter in CoS International Warlock Convention of 1289, also in CoS Steve51445 wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/119512 : << But what about the references to other otter related animals around the Burrow? >> to which Carol replied in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/119580 : << It's interesting that the Weasley (Weasel-ly) family would live near Otter-y St. Catchpole. There must be some sort of connection. Possibly JKR wants to partially vindicate weasels, which she sees as having an undeserved bad reputation? >> <> to which Steve51445 replied in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/119588 : << I did do a bit more searching online, and I found a Burrow Hill Farm a couple of Km's to the SE of Ottery St. Mary. >> JKR went to university at U of Exeter, which as Steve (neither Lexicon nor bboyminn) has discovered, is near places named Otterton, Ottery St Mary, Burrow Farm, Venn Ottery, Chudleigh (as in "Chudley Cannons"?), and Stokeshead Hill ... I seem to recall that there was another place named Ottery, back when this Y!group was new (and not yet a Y!group) ... http://www.jkrowling.co.uk/textonly/extrastuff_view.cfm?id=7 says "Ron was the only one of three major characters whose surname never changed; he has been 'Weasley' from start to finish. In Britain and Ireland the weasel has a bad reputation as an unfortunate, even malevolent, animal. However, since childhood I have had a great fondness for the family mustelidae; not so much malignant as maligned, in my opinion." Shouldn't the family who lives in The Burrow be named the Bunnies rather than the Weasels? Carol wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/119527 : << Also, the suspicion was in place as early as Harry's baptism, fifteen months before Godric's Hollow, at which Lupin was conspicuously not present, even as a witness. >> I don't think Remus was *excluded* from the christening. My impression was that the Potters were either already in hiding, or else in a very big hurry, and therefore summoned only one person to be a godparent ... to me, JKR's comment that if Sirius had had a wife, then Harry could have had a godmother meant because Sirius and wife would have been at the same place when summoned and come together ... to me, Remus, Peter, and Lily's hypothetical friends weren't there only because the Potters didn't want to take any extra TIME summoning and waiting for the arrival of another person. << Carol, noting that she mistyped Voldemort as "Voledmort" >> All those weasels and otters and ferrets are VERY GOOD at hunting and eating voles. From afiveouncebird at yahoo.com Sun Dec 12 11:35:37 2004 From: afiveouncebird at yahoo.com (afiveouncebird) Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 11:35:37 -0000 Subject: A comment on SHIPs Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119774 I would generally not get involved in the SHIP debates but this just popped out at me. That being said, lets dive in. As we all know by now, JKR recently updated her site. In her 'rumours' section you find out that Neville and Luna are not getting together (See http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/rumours_view.cfm?id=24 ). I think she is also implying that the H/G and R/H SHIPs won't work out either. Notice how it is worded, "for quashing THIS rumour" (emphasis mine). I know JKR has also said there is "something going on" between Ron and Hermione but what if this something turns out the way Harry's relationship with Cho did? -Afob From sevenhundredandthirteen at yahoo.com Sun Dec 12 12:35:55 2004 From: sevenhundredandthirteen at yahoo.com (sevenhundredandthirteen) Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 12:35:55 -0000 Subject: Angry Harry in HBP and OotP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119775 >Java wrote (119681): >Harry being angry and arrogant is really my general >disappointment with ootp. I'm sure a lot of people have pointed out >Harry went from a quiet, mature, and happy boy and turned into a >whiny angry punk. >HunterGreen wrote (119701): >Its interesting that you were so put off by Harry's attitude in OotP >After seeing another student killed, being >tied to a tombstone by someone he saved the life of a year before, >watching the person who murdered his parents come back to life (so >to speak), he was tortured, barely made it back alive, and then was >sent home only a short time later to live with three people who >hate him and the only communication he has with anyone is just >cryptic letters to "be good" and that "there's a lot going on, but >we can't tell you what." >Eggplant wrote (119697): >Harry must be a silly little wimp to make tinny tiny little things >like that bother him. I'm sure in similar circumstances you would >have behaved far far more heroically. Laurasia: I agree with both points of view equally (sounds like a contradiction, right?). I think that Harry's OotP attitude was perfectly realistic when you think about everything Harry has had to face up until that point. AND I think that Angry!Harry came off as Whiny!Harry. The reason for this is apparent contradiction is because when I think about it in the context of the whole series, Harry's anger is perfectly understandable, but when I think about OotP as a brand new book, Harry is just some whiny kid. I picked up OotP as a new book. A new book that has its own beginning and its own end. Yes, OotP is part of a series, and I am not foolish enough to expect that everything that I had read before would suddenly become irrelevant. BUT, OotP is a book unto itself. Or rather, the previous four books in the Harry Potter Series were separate books unto themselves, and I was expecting OotP to be the same. This is why Angry!Harry (however realistic when you view the series as a whole) is somewhat abrupt and disorientating when you start OotP as a new book. We leave GoF with Harry feeling hopeful. He has seen death, but thinks that there is no point in worrying about what is to come yet. The last line of GoF is, after all: `What would come, would come... and he would have to meet it when he did.' Cut to the start of OotP. Harry is revisiting his pain, is scared and paranoid and anxious about the coming war. This change didn't happen over night. It happened because he was isolated for several weeks when he needed support the most. Spending over a month alone is enough to send anyone from hopeful to afraid. However, we aren't shown this transitional period. Instead, we see Hopeful!Harry at the end of one book and CAPSLOCK! Harry at the start of the next. The reason for this is, yes, clear and distinct. Harry didn't unleash his angst for no reason at all- it is perfectly understandable in the context - but being alone with no opposition is the most boring thing you can have in a book. Somebody sitting by themselves with nothing happening to them, not battling anything, but just doing nothing and being slowly worn away... BORING! No opposition! No change! Clearly, to start OoTP with such a scenario would be incredibly unsuccessful as a captivating opening to a book, so JKR has done what any writer would- cut to the part where Harry finally has some opposition. The only problem is, in cutting out the time he spent alone she has cut out the very thing which transformed him from hopeful. She has cut out his character's turning point. By cutting it out, JKR hasn't been able to *show* us Harry's change. Instead, we are thrust into the story *after* the change has occurred and *told* about how it happened. As a reader, I can empathise much better with characters when I feel what they feel *when* they feel it. Meeting Angry!Harry after just leaving Hopeful!Harry disoriented me. I couldn't empathise with him because I never saw Harry being eaten away slowly day after day. I only ever heard about it after the fact. Just hearsay. I never felt the turning point when Harry began to lose faith in his friends because I wasn't there when it happened. It was somewhere off after `The Beginning' but before `Dudley Demented.' Off-page, off-screen. The most important incident which sets up the entire character arc and plot of OotP- Harry starts behaving angry and rash - isn't there! But, like I said above- the reason is clear. Being alone is boring! Although I am whining about *not* seeing Harry alone for a month, reading about Harry alone for a month may have been just as bad. Imagine the first four chapters as "Harry Stuck at the Dursleys." Starts off okay. Then the letters aren't very useful. He can't visit anyone. Voldemort hasn't made a move and no one can tell him why. And then it stays like that. For a week. For a fortnight. For an entire bloody month. AHH!!!! I would be going insane! `Dear JKR, when is this book going to actually start? Love, Laurasia.' However, there is no denying that when in the hypothetical Chapter (now) 5 "Dudley Demented" when Harry screams and yells and practically attacks Vernon Dursley I would be right up there with him screaming `Yes, Harry! I know exactly how you feel! Because I have just read four chapters of nothingness and felt it all right along with you. I was with you when you were hopeful, and week after week I became exactly as confused and frustrated as you are now about this sever lack of news.' JKR made an intelligent narrative/plot choice (cut to exciting bit), but in doing so she made a poor characterisation choice (cut out Harry's character turning point). This meant OotP started with a bang, but that readers had to adapt to the different characterisation very quickly. Also, Harry spends a great deal of the book reflecting on all the things that he has achieved- `I saved the Philosopher's Stone, I went into the Chamber of Secrets...' All valid points, right. But I find it incredibly unconvincing to listen to a character whinge about all the things he's done and why he's special and why he deserves to be treated better, without actually seeing those events for myself. Wait a second, of course you've seen those events for yourself! You've read the other books haven't you? Yes, yes, yes. If you're read the entire series as one giant book then you're well set up to remember those events when Harry lists them, but I picked up OotP expecting a distinct book. Hearing a character talk about all the painful things they've experienced (when they've never been pained by them before)without actually seeing them suffer (in *this* book*) just makes Harry look like a whinger. "Oh, I did this, I did that! And It was four years ago,and I was perfectly okay with it them, but now I'm going to bring it back up to make myself look more important." I'm not going to sympathise for a character like that. Talking about OotP's place in the broad schema of the whole HP series makes it clear that it was both necessary and a realistic period for Harry. But I find that actually reading it as a book unto itself makes its flaws very apparent. And it all comes down to expectations. Books 1-4 were all distinct stories. OotP wasn't. Now, I am not saying that books that are continuations of stories must be inferior, only that I wasn't expecting that. If you don't know what to expect, its very hard to ground yourself and just read the story. In-my-not-so-humble-opinion, the one thing that would have saved me from thinking Angry!Harry = Whiny!Harry would be if OotP started with Harry as we left him in GoF and if we got to actually *see* him change into Angry!Harry. Hypothetical Chapter One: The Dursleys give Hopeful!Harry something to distract himself with (renovating the front garden sounds like a good idea) that he can measure time by. We see Harry spend his days doing something and slowly and no letters come. He writes many, dozens, which become progressively more desperate, and none of the replies satisfy him. We see the pile of discarded Daily Prophets become bigger and bigger. Then, "It had been over a month. The front garden was complete. Harry picked up the last pile of swept leaves and put them into the compost bin. He threw his pile of letters and old newspapers right on top then closed the lid. He didn't understand it. It had been over a *month!* He walked over to kitchen window and laid down, exhausted, behind the dying begonias. Insert OotP text-as-we-know-it..." This, IMO, would have oriented readers better. They would have entered into OotP with Harry as they were familiar with him (Hopeful! Harry from the end of GoF) and then empathised completely as Harry transformed into Angry!Harry through a lack of news because they would have seen it for themselves. Angry!Harry's character arc culminates when he rushes rashly off to the MoM, despite it being an insane thing to do seeing as it was 5pm on a weekday afternoon at the time. Also, I'm sorry for generalising about `readers.' Not everyone found that they couldn't adapt to Harry's characterisation in OotP. Presumably because they were using logic and thinking in the context of the series as a whole and were satisfied to accept that Harry was going to be angry and rash for the sake of the story (without ever needing to see the transitional period for themselves). Maybe this is a more intelligent way to read. When HBP comes out I will not expect it to be a distinct novel unto itself. In order to avoid the same disorientation and disappointment that I felt with OotP, I am only going to expect HBP to be part of series, not a distinct book unto itself with its own beginning and resolution. This means that I won't be disorientated if Harry has an abruptly different character development. And it means I won't be confused if the turning point that dictates Harry's character arcis not in HBP but is at the end of OotP or off-page entirely. Sure, it will still irritate me if I can't *see* Harry's turning point, but it can be forgiven if it is logically consistent with the series. Angry!Harry *was* consistent. The lists of everything that Harry had to face up until that point are completely valid. If only I could have been shown the change, not just told about it after it had already happened. This brings up a debatable point: should we treat HP as a one giant book, or should it be read as 7 separate books? ~<(Laurasia)>~ From stevejjen at earthlink.net Sun Dec 12 13:28:25 2004 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 13:28:25 -0000 Subject: JKR's cryptic answer: Who sent the Lestranges to the Longbottoms? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119776 Snow: > I'll try again with a thought I had in a post some months ago, > pertaining to this subject, that Harry was left with the > Longbottoms for safe keeping during the missing twenty-four hours, > which led the remaining death-eaters definite cause to > investigate. > > Where else would Harry be safe and well taken care of, after his > parent's death, but an Aurors house, who by the way just had a > child themselves that knew Harry's parents being in the Order > together. Jen: I keep forgetting the missing 24 hours because part of me worries this is another 'maths' problem on JKR's part. I do hope there's a significance there, and like you said later, Hagrid might need a little help taking care of an infant! Snow: > Everything went flawlessly that day into the night but someone > knew the whereabouts of the child that brought down their Master, > Voldemort. The people protecting this child, who disposed of their > Master, surely would know something? Jen: There's a hitch, though. In my mind JKR was indicating the Longbottoms, unlike Bella & Co. were aware of the prophecy and the possibilities for Neville as a target. Surely they would also be protected by the Fidelius? Unless they refused. As aurors, perhaps they made a choice *not* to go into hiding and to continue to fight the good fight. That's pretty risky though, with Neville's life on the line. Snow: > Someone in the ranks of Voldemort knew that Harry, the resilient > child, had been taken to the Longbottoms for protection after the > incident at Godric's Hollow. It would have, however, been > assumable to Voldemort's mates that anyone who had been given such > a high priority task (as to take care of the child that destroyed > Voldemort) would also know some circumstances of the whereabouts > of the victim. The Longbottoms surely would have been privy to > information of what had happened to their Master, right? No, they > weren't, which was ingenious of the General in charge, > Dumbledore. (It's rough being a General) Jen: This would be highly disappointing to me if Dumbledore essentially set up the Longbottoms without any means of protecting them. He would be risking not only the Longbottoms lives, but Neville's and Harry's as well if he sent Harry to a location unprotected by the Fidelius or other means. Now if the Longbottoms *were* in a protected location, that means another betrayl by a Secret Keeper. That would be a little redundant after the Pettigrew betrayl, but more palatable than the first option. One last possibility: Harry did stay with the Longbottoms, but the DE visit happened several weeks or months after that fateful night, long enough for the Longbottoms to be out of hiding. Snow: > Lucius looks too obvious of a suspect to inform the death-eater > troops of his findings of information on Harry but he is of course > suspect. I'm not quite certain who I would attribute the "Harry > whereabouts" to be, but it is extremely doubtful, if not > impossible that it was Snape. Jen: I wish we had a better candidate than Lucius. There's not much suspense there. And if JKR hadn't said the Lestranges were "sent" to the Longbottoms, I would go on believing it was Bella who engineered the whole thing. After all, in the Pensieve scene in GOF, she yells out, "The Dark Lord will rise again, Crouch!...he will reward us beyond any of his other supporters! *We alone were faithful! We alone tried to find him!*" (emphasis mine) (US, chap. 30, p. 596) Do you think all this was another editing error on JKR's part or did someone really 'send' them? Cause by the time their trial rolled around, it appeared to be after most of the other DE trials; Crouch Sr. was 'gaunter and grayer' than before. Hmmm.. Jen From cmjohnstone at hotmail.com Sun Dec 12 14:35:50 2004 From: cmjohnstone at hotmail.com (littleleahstill) Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 14:35:50 -0000 Subject: JKR's cryptic answer: "Who sent the Lestranges to the Longbottoms?" Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119777 Jen: I wish we had a better candidate than Lucius. There's not much suspense there. And if JKR hadn't said the Lestranges were "sent" to the Longbottoms, I would go on believing it was Bella who engineered the whole thing. After all, in the Pensieve scene in GOF, she yells out, "The Dark Lord will rise again, Crouch!...he will reward us beyond any of his other supporters! *We alone were faithful! We alone tried to find him!*" (emphasis mine) (US, chap. 30, p. 596) Do you think all this was another editing error on JKR's part or did someone really 'send' them? Cause by the time their trial rolled around, it appeared to be after most of the other DE trials; Crouch Sr. was 'gaunter and grayer' than before. Hmmm.. Leah now: 'another editing error'- my thought as well, because I've always assumed that the attack on the Longbottoms was an idea of Bella's, acting alone, or rather having the idea all by herself and taking hubby and brother in law along for the fun. However, I did note that JKR said that it was "the Lestranges" who were sent. No mention of the other person who was condemned for his involvement in Auror torture-Barty Crouch Jnr. Another editing error or a deliberate omission? Just why is Barty Jnr LV's 'most faithful servant'? What has he done except possibly be in the wrong place at the wrong time and desperately try and protest his innocence in the courtroom scene? What a contrast with Bella's performance at the trial. And plenty of other DEs spent longer in Azkaban than Barty Jnr had to cope with. Why on earth did LV rush round on his return to de-imperius this frightened boy when he already had the vaguely competent Pettigrew in tow and access to the likes of Malfoy and Nott? What really seems to get LV's goat in the graveyard scene is the fact that none of his followers tried to look for him. That's why I think if his slippery friend Lucius had been behind the attack on Frank and Alice, he would have let LV know. So, what if Barty Jnr had been not the onlooker at, but the promoter of, the "let's ask the Longbottoms" approach? And his behaviour at trial was a fine piece of acting for his mother's benefit? That might well make him LV's favourite boy. There are a couple of other possiblities- Nott, who tries to tell LV in the graveyard that he, Nott, is the most faithful servant, but is cut off by LV. Or Rookwood, who is the insider at the MOM. And a final thought, why doesn't that accomplished Leglimens and wielder of veritaserum, DD actually know whether Barty Jnr is innocent or not? Leah From foxmoth at qnet.com Sun Dec 12 14:50:05 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 14:50:05 -0000 Subject: JKR's cryptic answer: Who sent the Lestranges to the Longbottoms? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119778 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jen Reese" wrote: > > Jen: I wish we had a better candidate than Lucius. There's not much suspense there. And if JKR hadn't said the Lestranges were "sent" to the Longbottoms, I would go on believing it was Bella who engineered the whole thing. After all, in the Pensieve scene in GOF, she yells out, "The Dark Lord will rise again, Crouch!...he will reward us beyond any of his other supporters! *We alone were faithful! We alone tried to find him!*" (emphasis mine) (US, chap. 30, p. 596) > > Do you think all this was another editing error on JKR's part or did someone really 'send' them? Cause by the time their trial rolled around, it appeared to be after most of the other DE trials; Crouch Sr. was 'gaunter and grayer' than before. Hmmm.. > Pippin: Bella taking all the credit and possibly covering up for someone else? Now, where else might she be doing that... "Harry heard Bellatrix Lestrange's triumphant scream, but knew it meant nothing--Sirius had only just fallen through the archway, he would appear from the other side any second...." -OOPch 35 Is Harry's refusal to believe that Sirius is dead the only reason that Bella's scream means nothing? Pippin wondering if JKR has decided the game is up From moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com Sun Dec 12 15:22:17 2004 From: moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com (K G) Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 07:22:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Hermione's age and Ron's wand In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041212152217.73246.qmail@web53506.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119779 slgazit wrote: --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "davewitley" wrote: > I put it on a par with her being happy with films which portray > Harry with blue eyes. She had no choice if she wanted Daniel Radcliff (sp?) for the role. I remember seeing on a website once a comment that he had an allergy for the colored lenses they tried to use on him. Salit It is amazing how simple a thing as eye color can be changed by "movie magik". moonmyyst __________________________________________________ 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 annemehr at yahoo.com Sun Dec 12 17:14:05 2004 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 17:14:05 -0000 Subject: Angry Harry in HBP and OotP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119780 Laurasia: > We leave GoF with Harry feeling hopeful. He has seen death, but > thinks that there is no point in worrying about what is to come yet. > The last line of GoF is, after all: `What would come, would > come... and he would have to meet it when he did.' Cut to the > start of OotP. Harry is revisiting his pain, is scared and paranoid > and anxious about the coming war. Annemehr: I admit to having finished OoP the first time feeling stunned. Though I found Harry's outbursts painful, I didn't think of them as whiny. Maybe it's because I interpreted Harry's state at the end of GoF differently. Another passage, besides the one you cited, stuck with me: "He liked it best when he was with Ron and Hermione, and they were talking about other things, or else letting him sit in silence while they played chess." Add that to: "When he looked back, even a month later, Harry found he had few memories of the following days. It was as though he had been through too much to take in any more." >From those passages, I read numbness and shock. So when I read the "what would come, would come" line in that context it seemed as though Harry had only the intellectual realization that the war was coming without the emotional capacity to react. His quietude came not from hope, but emotional paralysis. Because of this, I spent the whole wait for OoP worrying about what state he would be in and whether anyone was going to see to him while he was at Privet Drive. That aborted hug from Mrs. Weasley had something to do with it, too. Looking back, I wonder why I didn't see that more as a forshadowing for OoP. Laurasia: > This change didn't happen over night. It happened because he was > isolated for several weeks when he needed support the most. Spending > over a month alone is enough to send anyone from hopeful to afraid. > > However, we aren't shown this transitional period. Annemehr: I agree with you, I think JKR skipped what could have been a good transition, and I don't think it had to be boring. She's good at telling a lot with a few words if she has to. She did, in fact, tell a lot about that month in retrospectve form, but just fleshing out a scene or two in "real time" would have been very effective. Perhaps Harry could have woken from a nightmare about Cedric, got his Voldemort-free Daily Prophet, and fired off a letter while we were inside his head getting acclimated. A page and a half, maybe. Laurasia: > Angry!Harry *was* consistent. The lists of > everything that Harry had to face up until that point are completely > valid. If only I could have been shown the change, not just told > about it after it had already happened. > > This brings up a debatable point: should we treat HP as a one giant > book, or should it be read as 7 separate books? Annemehr: I think you are right to see the series as one story. I remember JKR saying she began by trying to allow readers to read the books independently; thus the recaps of characters and events taking up large percentages of the first chapter of the early books. But at this point, trying to make the plots stand alone is going to distort the overall tale. GoF was not as independent as the first three, and the plot of OoP is nothing without the other books. I think it is necessarily the same with Harry's character. He needs to grow from a basically normal boy into a young man capable of vanquishing Voldemort, and he has to do it believably. It's quite a long way to go and the journey will necessarily be split up over separate books. So, I understand your point. I can see how you could read more hope into the end of GoF than I did, and I also wished for OoP to begin a bit earlier in the summer. Come to think of it, I wished for a little more of what went on in Harry's head when he sat by the lake at the end of OoP. I'm guessing Jo didn't write it because it was not so much that he was thinking anything, but more just succumbing to the pain, because after that he didn't seem to be fighting it as much anymore. After that he was able to be with his friends again. But I'm by no means certain. [/rambling] Annemehr From dolis5657 at yahoo.com Sun Dec 12 18:15:19 2004 From: dolis5657 at yahoo.com (dcgmck) Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 18:15:19 -0000 Subject: JKR's cryptic answer: "Who sent the Lestranges to the Longbottoms?" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119781 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "littleleahstill" wrote: > [snip] > Leah now: > > 'another editing error'- my thought as well, because I've always > assumed that the attack on the Longbottoms was an idea of Bella's, > acting alone, or rather having the idea all by herself and taking > hubby and brother in law along for the fun. > > However, I did note that JKR said that it was "the Lestranges" who > were sent. No mention of the other person who was condemned for his involvement in Auror torture-Barty Crouch Jnr. Another editing error or a deliberate omission? > > Just why is Barty Jnr LV's 'most faithful servant'? What has he done except possibly be in the wrong place at the wrong time and > desperately try and protest his innocence in the courtroom scene? > What a contrast with Bella's performance at the trial. And plenty of other DEs spent longer in Azkaban than Barty Jnr had to cope with. > Why on earth did LV rush round on his return to de-imperius this > frightened boy when he already had the vaguely competent Pettigrew in tow and access to the likes of Malfoy and Nott? [snip] dcgmck: Barty, Jr. sprang to mind for me as well when I first read JKR's latest teasers. Though young, he put me very much in mind of Tom Riddle at Hogwarts: accomplished yet dissatisfied with the recognition (and lack thereof). He is clearly fueled by an enormous amount of hate, especially for his father. This combination of talent and animosity makes him an excellent choice as favored pet for LV. It also puts him in perfect position to discredit Crouch, Sr. in a way unavailable to anyone else. Discrediting Crouch, Sr. and accepting imprisonment in Azkaban not only proves his loyalty to his evil master, it also falls in line with the idea of torture as the preferred option over death. I can easily see it being Barty's idea to make use of the sadistic Bella to torture the Longbottoms. There doesn't seem to have been any effort to conceal the act, assuring that they would be caught, he would be tried, and his father would leave himself open to public censure for somehow allowing his only son to either turn out badly or be unjustly imprisoned. Either way, those who have thrice defied LV are seriously hurt and Barty's own dad is forever ruined politically, effectively hamstrung in making further war on DE's. It's a master stroke of brilliance, one of which even LV would be proud. The fact that Barty's mom is a soft touch and his father's Achilles' heel is just icing on Jr.'s cake. I like Barty for it, far better than Lucius or some other as yet unnamed DE. From McGregorMax at ec.rr.com Sun Dec 12 20:58:49 2004 From: McGregorMax at ec.rr.com (mcmaxslb) Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 20:58:49 -0000 Subject: Hermione's age In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119782 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "slgazit" wrote: > An older Hermione also makes her character more believable in my > opinion - she is so much more mature than the two boys, that it > stretches credibility to believe she could be even younger than they > yes I know that girls are more mature than boys the same age but not that much...). It also answers some questions like why Hermione knew so much about Hogwarts in PS/SS, she had a whole year to read up on it. And whether you need to be eleven to go to Hogwarts or in the year you turn eleven, now we know. From annemehr at yahoo.com Sun Dec 12 21:08:12 2004 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 21:08:12 -0000 Subject: Possession: Taking it Further In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119783 I am posting this message as a reply to Dungrollin's post about possession, because hers is a very comprehensive overview of what we know so far: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/116301 I have been thinking about where the idea of possession might be leading. * * * * * `Only one power remained to me. I could possess the bodies of others.' [GoF ch. 33] * * * * * Possession seems to be Voldemort's ultimate weapon. It's the power he didn't lose when he became a vapor, and as Harry has experienced, it is even more reliable than the Imperius Curse. Harry escaped it once only because Voldemort broached the idea of Harry's death, which evoked in Harry the emotion that cast him out. I don't think we can rely on this to keep Harry safe from another attempt. Voldemort need only use him in ways that avoid mortal peril. If he strikes quickly enough, he ought at least to be able to do quite a bit of damage before provoking such emotion again. I also doubt that Occlumency would be an effective defense, should Harry manage to learn it. Possession, after all, is no mere search of thought and memory, but an invasion of the victim's will and of his being. * * * * * `You flatter me,' said Dumbledore calmly. `Voldemort had powers I will never have.' `Only because you're too ? well - *noble* to use them.' [PS/SS ch. 1] * * * * * So how is Harry to defend himself? How would Harry practice? Can there be some technique to repel possession, which perhaps Dumbledore can teach him? That Dumbledore might know such a technique seems likely enough, because it is hard to imagine that Voldemort has the power to possess Dumbledore. If Voldemort could do so he probably wouldn't fear Dumbledore nearly as much as he does. Furthermore, perhaps the power of possession itself is one of those that Dumbledore has, but is too noble to use. This suggests scenes of Harry receiving anti-possession lessons with Dumbledore over the summer, evoking parallels, perhaps, to the way Occlumency lessons ought to have gone. There is another possibility. Harry himself might learn the art of possession. * * * * * `But I don't!' said Harry, in a strangled voice. `I haven't any powers he hasn't got, I couldn't fight the way he did tonight, I can't possess people or ? or kill them ?` [OoP ch. 37] * * * * * The problem here, of course, is the idea of Harry learning to do such a thing. If the Imperius Curse is Unforgivable, surely so is possessing another. If Dumbledore may be too noble to use the power, how noble would it be to teach Harry to do it? Of course, we need to sort out our priorities. Many of us have no qualms at all about Harry killing Voldemort, while others of us, seeing killing in defense of the innocent as moral, would rather Harry not be forced to do it. Some are sure he will use an Unforgivable again; others can't imagine him practicing them. Yet, war is war, and as we recall, Alastor Moody never killed *if he could help it,* as Sirius tells us in GoF [ch.27]. At this point, we can only guess what JKR's intentions may be with regard to how proactive Harry might be in this war. But perhaps there's a simpler way. * * * * * `You can speak Parseltongue, Harry,' said Dumbledore calmly, `because Lord Voldemort [...] can speak Parseltongue. Unless I'm much mistaken, he transferred some of his own powers to you the night he gave you that scar.' [CoS ch. 18] * * * * * I think it's very likely that Harry already has the power of possession, that he's had it since the attack at Godric's Hollow. I believe JKR was hinting in the quote above that Parseltongue was not the only power Harry received from Voldemort that night, and yet we have never had any clear indication of what others there might be. Harry will probably access this power in very special circumstances, though I can't guess whether Dumbledore will suggest it to him or Harry will spontaneously find it within himself. One possible route to Harry realising this power might be that Voldemort makes another attempt to possess Harry. With Voldemort being more careful about how far he pushes Harry, Harry is left struggling and may manage to turn the tables and assert control. I can see it as a battle of wills similar to the Priori Incantatem scene in the graveyard where Harry succeeded by strength of will in pushing the light beads back into Voldemort's wand. I can visualise it happening by another path, though, by looking at some scenes in OoP. * * * * * His body felt smooth, powerful and flexible. He was gliding between shining metal bars, across dark, cold stone ... [OoP ch. 21] `...I was there, I saw it ... I *did* it ...' [OoP ch. 21] `I was the snake,' he said. [OoP ch. 22] Left alone in the dark room, Harry turned towards the wall. A cracked, age-spotted mirror hung on the wall in the shadows. Harry moved towards it. His reflection grew larger and clearer in the darkness ... a face whiter than a skull ... red eyes with slits for pupils ... [OoP ch. 26] * * * * * It seems to me that Harry was on the threshold of actually possessing Voldemort in these visions. He was *there,* and the only thing lacking was that he had not asserted his will over the body. Suppose in the future that Harry has another such vision. It seems inevitable that he will; the scar connection has been steadily growing. This time, something is a little different: either Harry's been instructed by Dumbledore, or the connection is just a little stronger, or Harry reacts in horror and with more strength of will than he had before to something terrible that Voldemort is about to do. This time Harry succeeds in forcing his own will upon Voldemort and changing his actions. * * * * * As Hagrid had said, what would come, would come ... and he would have to meet it when it did. [GoF ch. 37] * * * * * What would this mean in the struggle between Harry and Voldemort? What might JKR's plans be? The answer might depend on when the event occurs. If it is to be before the final showdown, it ought to be a critical contribution to the defense: stopping a significant death, shaking the DEs' confidence and perhaps turning some, exposing or thwarting a plan, or even weakening Voldemort by exposing him to Harry's higher feelings. It also may lead to a standoff between the two, leaving Harry himself immune from being possessed (though he'd remain vulnerable to Voldemort's possession of others). On the other hand, perhaps Harry at first merely learns to repel Voldemort's attempts at possession by resisting with his own will, and yet never actually possesses Voldemort himself until the final confrontation. In that case, how might the scene play out? Immediately, the arch in the Death Chamber comes to mind: perhaps this is the way Harry will force Voldemort through it, as many believe he might do. We can speculate about what then would happen to Harry ? would he withdraw at the last minute and live, or go through with Voldemort and then wake up in his own body, or go through with him and die? Another possibility for a final confrontation is that Harry repeats what he did in OoP by flooding Voldemort with emotions, only this time, as the one possessed Voldemort is unable to escape. Harry's weapons now are the ability to possess Voldemort and the power behind the locked door, and he vanquishes the Dark Lord. I must remain vague as to how this is resolved as I'm not sure what the final effects would be, or how exactly this would fit in with the prophecy. Though I don't think we can yet know where the story will take it, the idea of Harry possessing Voldemort seems almost irresistible. It involves one of Voldemort's primary powers, the fact that he passed powers on to Harry, their connection via the scar, and their escalating battle of wills. Unfortunately for Harry, he probably won't like it much and in fact, as the pain of the scar seems to be all on his side, so might the pain of possession. In a final showdown, it might even be lethal to him as he concentrates all his strength into vanquishing Voldemort. In the event that possession of Voldemort is not the final confrontation after all, it may be significant enough to precipitate it. We can only wait and see. Annemehr Dungrollin, in all that I've left of her post: > (Sighs)... This has taken me much longer than I expected. (Though, > admittedly, much of that was spent trying to decide whether to use a > question mark or exclamation mark in the subject heading). Yeah, something like that. From McGregorMax at ec.rr.com Sun Dec 12 21:13:19 2004 From: McGregorMax at ec.rr.com (mcmaxslb) Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 21:13:19 -0000 Subject: A comment on SHIPs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119784 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "afiveouncebird" wrote: > As we all know by now, JKR recently updated her site. In her > 'rumours' section you find out that Neville and Luna are not getting > together (See > http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/rumours_view.cfm?id=24 ). I think > she is also implying that the H/G and R/H SHIPs won't work out either. In sinking the Neville/Luna ship JKR has also dealt a blow to both Ron/Hermione and Harry/Ginny. For now Neville and Luna are realistic alternatives for Ron and Ginny respectively. > I know JKR has also said there is "something going on" between Ron > and Hermione That was said in an interview from five years ago before OotP which changed everything. From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Sun Dec 12 21:18:24 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 21:18:24 -0000 Subject: JKR's cryptic answer: "Who sent the Lestranges to the Longbottoms?" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119786 > dcgmck: > > Barty, Jr. sprang to mind for me as well when I first read JKR's > latest teasers. > I like Barty for it, far better than Lucius or some other as yet > unnamed DE. Neri: The Barty Jr possibility again raises the "something rotten in the Ministry" scenario. The Longbottoms were NOT attacked because of the prophecy, so why were they attacked? My guess is that there's a whole backstory behind this, or JKR would have been much more careful with her words. Here is one possibility: The Longbottoms were both aurors, and they must have known something about the Ministry security operations. Maybe Crouch Sr had some big secret plan. Say, bringing the ancient death arch to the DoM in order to trial and execute Vapormort (which is why the death room has spectator seats). Fudge is in the know, but probably isn't trusted with the details. The Longbottoms are appointed to the job of finding Vapormort and bringing to justice. Crouch Sr has some brilliant plan how to achieve this, which possibly involves some questionable Dark Arts, but it's all for a good cause, so it's OK, isn't it? DD is very much against this, of course, because he knows only Harry can vanquish Voldy, but Crouch doesn't listen to his advice. Then Crouch Sr lets slip a word about this plan to his son. So young Barty contacts Bella. They don't know much about the operation, but Barty realizes the Longbottoms hold the key to this whole thing, so they attack them and torture them, trying to find what is going on and how to reach Vapormort. Young Barty and the Lestranges are caught (my guess: this was the battle in which Moody lost his eye and foot) but the whole Ministry plan is wrecked. Crouch Sr realizes the DEs could only know about this through his slip to young Barty, and this is why he is so sure his son is guilty. After the trial Crouch Sr is shunted to a side office, and Fudge, the new Minister, tries to cover the Ministry's blunder. Covering includes the hurried execution of Barty Jr in the end of GoF, and keeping the Longbottoms sedated in St. Mungo's (they must know something critical). In the HBP they will somehow manage to let Neville and the trio know about this, and Fudge will lose his job. The bubblegum puzzler suggests that the big mystery about the attack is not necessarily WHO dunnit, but WHY. As I wrote here before, the secret that the Longbottoms try to pass to Neville must be something critical and new, or it will be an anticlimax when it is finally revealed. It might be the way to get rid of Voldy. And after the demise of the Crouches, possibly the Longbottom are the only people who still know the details. Neri From McGregorMax at ec.rr.com Sun Dec 12 21:45:54 2004 From: McGregorMax at ec.rr.com (mcmaxslb) Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 21:45:54 -0000 Subject: Angry Harry in HBP and OotP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119787 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "annemehr" wrote: > I admit to having finished OoP the first time feeling stunned. Though I found Harry's outbursts painful, I didn't think of them as whiny. Harry's anger thought out OotP (the part that was not Voldemort's rage leaking into him from the connection they have) was righteous giving the way he was abandoned by every one. One of the things that bother me about HP in that Harry receives so little support after such traumatic experiences. And that the blood protections are not worth the damage the Dursleys inflect on Harry every summer. If Dumbledore just dumps Harry at number 4 like last year and lets him sink into guilt and grief it will be a miracle in he doesn't slit his wrists. Being that JKR has said that Harry's stay at #4 will be short this year that those around him will be there for him for once. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Dec 12 23:22:26 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 23:22:26 -0000 Subject: Angry Harry in HBP and OotP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119788 Mcmaxslb wrote: snip. Harry's anger thought out OotP (the part that was not Voldemort's rage leaking into him from the connection they have) was righteous giving the way he was abandoned by every one. One of the things that bother me about HP in that Harry receives so little support after such traumatic experiences. And that the blood protections are not worth the damage the Dursleys inflect on Harry every summer. Alla: Can I just rant for a little bit again how idiotic I find Dumbledore's trategy after GoF in regards to Harry? No, I am not talking now about whether he was right or not to leave Harry with Dursleys in the first place. I am only talking about how little or NO support whatsoever Harry was given after being through horrible trauma at the Graveyard. So, Harry saw Cedric to die, unwillingly helped Voldie to rise. Doesn't take a genuis to figure out that the boy will not be in the best mental shape. Harry anxiously awaits news , ANY news from WW about Voldemort. What does Dumbledore do? Oh, yes, he orders Ron and Hermione not to tell Harry anything of importance. Smart... NOT. We discussed earlier that psychiatric help seems to be suspiciously absent in WW. So, support of the loved ones is twice as important, IMO. Hmmm. Could Dumbledore at least do that for Harry? Mcmaxslb: If Dumbledore just dumps Harry at number 4 like last year and lets him sink into guilt and grief it will be a miracle in he doesn't slit his wrists. Being that JKR has said that Harry's stay at #4will be short this year that those around him will be there for him for once. Alla: Yes, I sure hope that Dumbledore learned his lessons as he claimed at the end of OOP. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Dec 12 23:35:58 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 23:35:58 -0000 Subject: Possession: Taking it Further In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119789 Annemehr: snips the large part of Anne's post Another possibility for a final confrontation is that Harry repeats what he did in OoP by flooding Voldemort with emotions, only this time, as the one possessed Voldemort is unable to escape. Harry's weapons now are the ability to possess Voldemort and the power behind the locked door, and he vanquishes the Dark Lord. I must remain vague as to how this is resolved as I'm not sure what the final effects would be, or how exactly this would fit in with the prophecy. Though I don't think we can yet know where the story will take it, the idea of Harry possessing Voldemort seems almost irresistible. It involves one of Voldemort's primary powers, the fact that he passed powers on to Harry, their connection via the scar, and their escalating battle of wills. Unfortunately for Harry, he probably won't like it much and in fact, as the pain of the scar seems to be all on his side, so might the pain of possession. In a final showdown, it might even be lethal to him as he concentrates all his strength into vanquishing Voldemort. In the event that possession of Voldemort is not the final confrontation after all, it may be significant enough to precipitate it. We can only wait and see. Alla: Great post, Anne. Yes, it seems to me that possession is bound to play major part in the story, if for no other reason than JKR often uses major plot devices twice. I want to say that it will be used in the final confrontation, But I am not sure, because it was already used in a major way in OOP, so maybe it will indeed precipitate final battle. In the event it will happen, I can see Harry's willingly possessing Voldemort, but unable to keep control of Voldemort's body and then Voldemort taking control again. Don't ask me for details :o), but maybe some of Harry's friends will be able to help Harry to take control again (Neville? Ginny?) by reminding him about the power Dark Lord knows not (I think everybody agrees that it will play signifcant part). What will happen next? Need book 7 now. :) From dk59us at yahoo.com Mon Dec 13 01:25:32 2004 From: dk59us at yahoo.com (Eustace_Scrubb) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 01:25:32 -0000 Subject: JKR's cryptic answer: "Who sent the Lestranges to the Longbottoms?" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119790 Leah: > What if Barty Jnr had been not > the onlooker at, but the promoter of, the "let's ask the Longbottoms" > approach? And his behaviour at trial was a fine piece of acting for > his mother's benefit? That might well make him LV's favourite boy. Eustace_Scrubb: That's a most interesting idea. Barty the Younger was apparently unsuspected until his arrest. That could mean that he could have managed a way to access confidential MoM information through his father beforehand. Perhaps this indicated that the Longbottoms were another potential target for Voldemort. Since the Lestranges didn't know about the prophecy, perhaps a mole in the ministry (or with high level contacts in the MoM) pointed them in that direction. I also wonder to what extent the quick dissemination of the "official story" about what happened at Godric's Hollow might be interpreted by DEs as Ministry disinformation...I think Bellatrix and maybe others would find it hard to believe that their Fearless Leader had been vanquished by a toddler, especially if they were unaware of the prophecy and therefore had no reason to believe this child posed a specific risk. Cheers, Eustace_Scrubb From stevejjen at earthlink.net Mon Dec 13 01:50:27 2004 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 01:50:27 -0000 Subject: Possession: Taking it Further In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119791 Annemehr: > Possession seems to be Voldemort's ultimate weapon. It's the > power hedidn't lose when he became a vapor, and as Harry has > experienced, itis even more reliable than the Imperius Curse. > Harry escaped it onceonly because Voldemort broached the idea of > Harry's death, whichevoked in Harry the emotion that cast him > out. I don't think we canrely on this to keep Harry safe from > another attempt. Voldemort needonly use him in ways that avoid > mortal peril. Jen: This is good stuff Annemehr, even if it does make my head hurt to sort it all out ;). But you made me think about things in a new way. Like in the above passage: Couldn't Harry's power be that LV can never truly possess him, especially now that LV understands Harry is full of love/life-force/courage? Because when Dumbledore talked openly to Harry at the end of OOTP, he seemed to think Harry was safe. And it couldn't have been due to some magical effect of the Headmaster's office, because DD saw LV 'flickering' behind Harry's eyes during the portkey travel at Christmas. > * * * * * > `You can speak Parseltongue, Harry,' said Dumbledore calmly, `because > Lord Voldemort [...] can speak Parseltongue. Unless I'm much > mistaken, he transferred some of his own powers to you the night he > gave you that scar.' > [CoS ch. 18] > * * * * * > > I think it's very likely that Harry already has the power of > possession, that he's had it since the attack at Godric's Hollow. > I believe JKR was hinting in the quote above that Parseltongue was > not the only power Harry received from Voldemort that night, and > yet we have never had any clear indication of what others there > might be. Harry will probably access this power in very special > circumstances,though I can't guess whether Dumbledore will suggest > it to him or Harry will spontaneously find it within himself. Jen: This is purely personal opinion, but I hope Harry doesn't have the power of possession. He and Voldemort are slowly being fused together over time, but to me that's not possession so much as the powerful effect of whatever bonded them at GH, and LV's return to mortality. Instead, since Harry was able to repel Voldemort in OOTP, I hope that is yet one less advantage Voldemort can wield over him in coming confrontations. Slowly, slowly, all the power inequities between the two are melting away and Harry is gaining in strength (much as he did during the Priori Incantatem, like you mention later in a different context). Annemehr: > One possible route to Harry realising this power might be that > Voldemort makes another attempt to possess Harry. With Voldemort > being more careful about how far he pushes Harry, Harry is left > struggling and may manage to turn the tables and assert control. I > can see it as a battle of wills similar to the Priori Incantatem scene > in the graveyard where Harry succeeded by strength of will in pushing > the light beads back into Voldemort's wand. Jen: I see this happening too, but it's back to a difference in terminology: Rather than fighting over true physical possession of a body, they would be battling for mind control. True freedom of choice. This would still work with the idea that Dumbledore can safely talk to Harry, because Harry will become very aware when Voldemort is exerting control. Like a sixth sense. He'll learn to discriminate which thoughts are his and which ones Voldemort is trying to insert (i.e., Sirius at the DOM). And maybe Occlumency as well (finally)? Annemehr: > Suppose in the future that Harry has another such vision. It > seems inevitable that he will; the scar connection has been > steadily growing. This time, something is a little different: > either Harry's been instructed by Dumbledore, or the connection is > just a little stronger, or Harry reacts in horror and with more > strength of will than he had before to something terrible that > Voldemort is about to do. This time Harry succeeds in forcing his > own will upon Voldemort and changing his actions. Jen: Or Voldemort could find as the connection strengthens that he is unable to carry out his plans while attempting to control Harry. He'll discover that Harry's wishes, choices, etc. are wreaking havoc on his evil overlord plans and LV will attempt to close the connection with horrible consequences . As to Annemehr's speculation about the logical end for this connection the two have, maybe any and all of your suggestions?!? I'm extremely curious to see if this issue is essentially over--LV cannot reside in Harry given his great power of *whatever*--or if the end of OOTP is merely the beginning of the possession theory. I guess I'd like to see something different, LV yielding some heinous new power in Books 6 & 7. There seems no end to JKR's imagination-- maybe we have yet to see the truly terrible powers of Voldemort and the control he can exert over people. Jen From kirbyrl at charter.net Mon Dec 13 01:59:13 2004 From: kirbyrl at charter.net (kyntor70) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 01:59:13 -0000 Subject: Hermione's age In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119792 Salit wrote: "An older Hermione also makes her character more believable in my opinion - she is so much more mature than the two boys, that it stretches credibility to believe she could be even younger than they (yes I know that girls are more mature than boys the same age but not that much...)." I don't really know if you can say that Hermione is much more mature than the two boys or not. Hermione is a very studious and a very by the rules types of person. This actually makes her seem more mature than she really is. There is no doubt that she is more mature in some things than the two boys are. However, in other things, she is not so mature in. As far as emotional maturity goes, Hermione is the most mature. She not only knows how to control and deal with her own emotions, but she is also quite empathic towards the people around her. Ron has always had a bad temper problem as well as bouts of jealousy. Living with the Dursleys for 10 years, Harry has hardly ever dealt with his emotions, he mainly just surpressed them. However, the area in which Hermione is not that mature is understanding what is truly important. In this area, Harry is much more mature than she is. Her by the rules personality makes it difficult sometimes to see anything beyond the rules. Harry like Dumbledore has a tendency to follow the spirit of the rules rather than the letter of the rules. I think this also causes her to misunderstand house elves as well. As far as Ron goes, I don't think he is very mature in this area either. Harry's fame and wealth has a tendency to appeal to Ron a little too much. It will be interesting to see how the three change over the course of the final two books. kyntor70 From dfrankiswork at netscape.net Mon Dec 13 02:16:10 2004 From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (davewitley) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 02:16:10 -0000 Subject: website SPOILERS . Who goes to Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119793 > Lexicon Steve: > What I immediately noticed is that she only half-way answered the > question. So did Stan Shunpike go to Hogwarts? How common is it for > people NOT to go? Alla: > Yes, you are right, but I got the answer to the question I was > interested the most in light of the discussions we had earlier - how > easy it is to get admitted to Hogwarts, how elitistic the admission > system is, etc. > > I am also glad that as long as magical child shows spark of magic > he/she considered to be a wizard. That is true, but it is not the whole truth. As far as *Hogwarts* is concerned, all that matters is that you are magical, but, IMO, JKR's answer manages to leave wide open the question of how much role class plays in the wizarding world. (As a historical aside, I think analysis of class was the original motivation for creating the Shunpike question, though I may be missing some of the story.) People may choose not to send their children to Hogwarts because they would feel socially uncomfortable doing so; they may feel that to do so would be to be a class traitor; they may be intimidated or bribed by those who did go to Hogwarts; they may positively support a class system that Hogwarts (and Dumbledore) opposes. It's noteworthy that Dumbledore's ethos (as far as we can judge by the Sorting Hat's songs) seems broadly in line with that of Hogwarts through its history, yet it seems to have had little success in a wider wizarding world which supposedly has mostly passed through Hogwarts. Then there's the whole issue of money. I feel that the evidence is that there are no tuition fees (Molly, for example, never complains of this though she does worry about textbook costs), but perhaps many families rely on children going into the family business in their teenage years? Alternatively there may be scholarships for the children of MOM employees, whose effect is to keep MOM jobs in the hands of a small elite. An effective system of class manipulation (this is Britain we are talking about, remember) will make it seem as if its class-based outcomes are the result of free choice. David From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Mon Dec 13 02:28:56 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 18:28:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Hermione's age In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041213022856.32457.qmail@web53110.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119794 So, Hermione was nearly 12 when she entered Hogwarts, when Ron and Harry had just turned 11, After 5 years, Harry and Ron turn 16 and Hermione will turn 17 on September. So this means she will be of legal age. Will she take apparition lessons over the summer? I can't wait to see if she learns how to, she could apparate at Privet Drive and make Harry a bit happier. Juli __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Mon Dec 13 03:10:39 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 03:10:39 -0000 Subject: JKR's cryptic answer: Who sent the Lestranges to the Longbottoms? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119795 Magda: > > So someone (I'm betting Lucius Malfoy, suddenly thrust into the > > position of Interim Leader after a few years as inner circle > > member and possibly experiencing his first rush of personal > > power) organizes a few true believers into a suicide mission and > > sets them on the Longbottoms, who it's possibly known LV had an > > interest in for an unknown reason. Jen: > I was thinking of Lucius too, but then...Snape popped into my > head. Snape seems the best fit as the person who overheard the > prophecy. If so, then he would know about the Longbottoms and > could send Bellatrix and Co. to extract info without telling them > why. BUT, given the timeline and Dumbledore's trust of Snape, > it's unlikely Snape could be behind both the Potters' and > Longbottoms' attacks and DD would still have faith in him. The > more I think about it, Lucius does seem the logical choice from > all the DE's we've met so far. (But that saps my favorite theory > that Lucius isn't really loyal to Voldemort. Maybe it can be > amended to say Lucius was loyal in the first war, but liked the > taste of power too much to take orders again ). SSSusan: I don't think Snape is a possibility -- assuming DD's word is trustworthy -- for didn't he say that Snape turned to their side *before* Voldy's downfall? Your thoughts about Lucius, especially as they pertain to his being loyal or not-loyal to Voldy, are interesting to consider. What about Fudge? Is there any way he could've had a role in this, does anyone think? Or Bagman? Wasn't he supposed to have done something he claimed was unwitting? Passing something along that he allegedly didn't understand? Would that fit? Siriusly Snapey Susan, who's too tired to do anything besides ask questions which will probably turn out to be stupid. From templar1112002 at yahoo.com Mon Dec 13 03:58:51 2004 From: templar1112002 at yahoo.com (templar1112002) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 03:58:51 -0000 Subject: A comment on SHIPs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119796 afiveouncebird wrote: > > I would generally not get involved in the SHIP debates but this just popped out at me. That being said, lets dive in. > > As we all know by now, JKR recently updated her site. In her > 'rumours' section you find out that Neville and Luna are not getting together (See http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/rumours_view.cfm?id=24 ). I think > she is also implying that the H/G and R/H SHIPs won't work out either. > Notice how it is worded, "for quashing THIS rumour" (emphasis mine). > I know JKR has also said there is "something going on" between Ron > and Hermione but what if this something turns out the way Harry's > relationship with Cho did. ******My first thought after I read her explanation was that she was also sinking Harry/Luna. I had similar thoughts when she sank Hermione/Draco, my mind went straight to Ginny/Draco being sunk, too. As for Hr/R, IMO she started drilling 'visible' holes on that ship in OoTP. If Ron makes a drastic make-over, those holes could be patched up, but I'm afraid that Hermione's focus will be on someone else by then (my happiness doesn't depend on Ron's goal-keeping abilities'). Plus, there were some sharks circling around it, one of them actually got another row of teeth this past Dec-10th: Luna Lovegood (Weasley is her King) lol. The H/G ship is still sailing, mainly because we really don't know much about Ginny's personality other than that she is becoming a clone of the twins and doesn't blush in front of Harry anymore, so yes, H/G shippers can still sail it, as it was always a 'make- believe, built-up, fairy-tale' ship from the beginning, IMHO :), and meaning no offense to H/G shippers (I actually like it, though I don't find it credible, yet). Her saying '...very different kinds of people...' made me think that so far, if there is any pairing going to happen with Harry (which might not, in the end), the most similar mind in Harry's life is Hermione, heck, they even know their thoughts and reactions most of the times, add to that Hermione's voice becoming his conscious one and that she has an obsession with his well-being and safety... Though I never shipped (blushing, yes I'm a shipper) N/L, I have to admit that it didn't bother me either, despite no canon hints at it whatsoever, it was rather cute and besides, it was like saying Seamus/Lavender... I mean, it really doesn't add much to the plot, does it? Jo's sinking it made me wonder the reason behind that action. After all, it wasn't that unreasonable (or ofensive, paraphrasing her words) as for example, Hr/Draco. Evidently she wanted to get a message across, and I believe that we might be on the right path in guessing her way of thinking. :) Marcela From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Mon Dec 13 04:45:08 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (jlnbtr) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 04:45:08 -0000 Subject: website SPOILERS . Who goes to Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119797 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "davewitley" wrote: > People may choose not to send their children to Hogwarts because > they would feel socially uncomfortable doing so; they may feel that > to do so would be to be a class traitor; they may be intimidated or > bribed by those who did go to Hogwarts; they may positively support > a class system that Hogwarts (and Dumbledore) opposes. Juli: What exactly do you mean by this? We've already seen all social classes at Hogwarts, from the so-called Royalty (Blacks, Malfoys), to orphans (Tom Riddle, Harry), to muggle-born (Hermione)... From annemehr at yahoo.com Mon Dec 13 05:35:33 2004 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 05:35:33 -0000 Subject: Possession: Taking it Further In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119798 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jen Reese" wrote: > > Annemehr, before: > > Possession seems to be Voldemort's ultimate weapon. [...] > > Harry escaped it once only because Voldemort broached the idea of > > Harry's death, which evoked in Harry the emotion that cast him > > out. I don't think we can rely on this to keep Harry safe from > > another attempt. > > Jen: > Couldn't Harry's power be that LV can > never truly possess him, especially now that LV understands Harry is > full of love/life-force/courage? Because when Dumbledore talked > openly to Harry at the end of OOTP, he seemed to think Harry was > safe. Annemehr: IMO, we can't assume Dumbledore began talking openly because he thought Harry was safe, because he was just admitting that it had been a mistake to avoid Harry the whole time he thought it was unsafe. The fact that there was no flicker of LV in Harry's eyes at the time may just have meant that LV had withdrawn to consider the new development of having been ejected from a possession. In other words, you may be right that Dumbledore thinks Harry is safe, but I can't see any way of telling that from the text. Annemehr before: > > I think it's very likely that Harry already has the power of > > possession, that he's had it since the attack at Godric's Hollow. > > Jen: This is purely personal opinion, but I hope Harry doesn't have > the power of possession. He and Voldemort are slowly being fused > together over time, but to me that's not possession so much as the > powerful effect of whatever bonded them at GH, and LV's return to > mortality. Annemehr: Uh oh, we have opposing hopes then! ;) I don't mind Harry having the power of possession, which he can then choose to wield at will or resolve never to use, or something in between. The idea that bothers me is that he is fusing with Voldemort, getting lost in this amalgam with evil. Though if Jo uses it I'll go with the flow, and your description of their struggle further on in the post makes it a more attractive theory for me, especially this part: > Jen: > This would still work with the idea that Dumbledore can safely talk > to Harry, because Harry will become very aware when Voldemort is > exerting control. Like a sixth sense. He'll learn to discriminate > which thoughts are his and which ones Voldemort is trying to insert > (i.e., Sirius at the DOM). And maybe Occlumency as well (finally)? Annemehr: I like this, because it has Harry really finding out who he is by opposing what's alien to him in Voldemort, and it would also have the effect of building Harry's strength for the final battle. I actually don't see this as incompatible with my possession theories, since I think they are two separate things. The power of possession was something Voldemort had since before Godric's Hollow, as he says it was the only power that *remained* to him after he was vaporised, and it was always a power Voldemort could use on victims other than Harry. The "scar" connection with Harry is something else again, forged by the curse that failed, and unique to the two of them. Its only link to possession is my theory that the power, like Parseltongue, was passed to Harry during the attack. I guess it's reasonable to think of Voldemort beginning to possess Harry from the time of the attack on Arthur (the speculations Harry heard from Moody on the Extendable Ears), which would be the cause of the flicker that Dumbledore saw in Harry's eyes. Perhaps it was fairly weak for so long because of the distance between them, and then at the MoM Voldemort turned the full force of his power on Harry. While I think "possession from afar" must have been facilitated by the scar connection (else LV would do that to everybody) I still see it as a separate thing from the scar connection, because I don't think it had anything to do with possession when Harry's scar hurt in PS/SS or when he had visions in dreams in GoF. Ow. Now *my* head hurts! > > Jen: > As to Annemehr's speculation about the logical end for this > connection the two have, maybe any and all of your suggestions?!? > I'm extremely curious to see if this issue is essentially over--LV > cannot reside in Harry given his great power of *whatever*--or if > the end of OOTP is merely the beginning of the possession theory. Annemehr: I'll second that. I wrote my post because of my feeling that the possession thread had really just begun. Then again, I once had the feeling that Harry would be perfectly happy to be a DADA teacher and Jo shot that one down. And while you're at it, anyone with a theory about how Dumbledore knew what saved Harry from possession in the MoM, please feel free to share. If he knew Harry was thinking of Sirius and his heart filled with emotion, how did DD find out, was Harry speaking out loud? If it's merely that DD knows what "the power behind the locked door" is, knows that Harry possesses it in vast quantities, and knows LV can't stand to be around it, then why was he afraid of Harry being possessed in the first place? Annemehr From gryffindor.phan at gmail.com Mon Dec 13 08:13:29 2004 From: gryffindor.phan at gmail.com (Arya) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 08:13:29 -0000 Subject: A comment on SHIPs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119799 Marcela "templar1112002" wrote: Though I never shipped (blushing, yes I'm a shipper) N/L, I have to admit that it didn't bother me either, despite no canon hints at it whatsoever, it was rather cute and besides, it was like saying Seamus/Lavender... I mean, it really doesn't add much to the plot, does it? Jo's sinking it made me wonder the reason behind that action. After all, it wasn't that unreasonable (or ofensive, paraphrasing her words) as for example, Hr/Draco. Evidently she wanted to get a message across, and I believe that we might be on the right path in guessing her way of thinking. :) ----- I wonder if her debunking of Nev/Luna outright means one or both of the two has a pre- ordained pairing in store for them. And as to with whom that could be, well, it's no secret Luna has had her eye on Ron, laughed at his jokes and sung his song while Neville went to the ball with Ginny and also had that little bout of rising to her rescue before the sextet left for the DoM. It's just interesting. I mean why else debunk a ship unless canon shall be written to eventually make it untrue? If neither Neville nor Luna were going to hook up (either temporarily or long term) with anyone else, then that ship is just a little romantic ideal floating idly in the waters and not bothering any canon--past, present or future. Arya From cmjohnstone at hotmail.com Mon Dec 13 09:58:26 2004 From: cmjohnstone at hotmail.com (littleleahstill) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 09:58:26 -0000 Subject: JKR's cryptic answer. Who sent the Lestranges to the Longbottoms? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119800 Neri wrote: (massive snipping) The Barty Jr possibility again raises the "something rotten in the Ministry" scenario. Leah now: Neri and dcgmck, I was very interested in your development of the Barty Crouch Jnr scenario. I was briefly sidetracked into wondering how LV found out about Barty Jnr, before I remembered it was Bertha Jorkins who was his unwilling source. Bertha of course had gone on holiday to Albania (as you do), where Quirrel had gone to look for vampires (not Transylvania, then?) and where Peter made contact with frightened woodland creatures. Peter had gone to the place where it had been 'long rumoured' that LV had gone to ground. Long rumoured by whom? And correctly as well (think of all the rumours re Lord Lucan, Martin Boorman etc). Someone knows more than they are telling, and like you, Neri, I suspect Frank and Alice hold the key (or the wrappers). And Bertha told LV that Barty Jnr was 'a faithful deatheater', so somewhere along the line she had heard something about Master Barty beyond his grovelling behaviour at the trial. Leah From udderpd at yahoo.co.uk Mon Dec 13 10:39:24 2004 From: udderpd at yahoo.co.uk (udder_pen_dragon) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 10:39:24 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: A comment on SHIPs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041213103924.45585.qmail@web25305.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119801 Arya wrote: Marcela "templar1112002" wrote: Though I never shipped (blushing, yes I'm a shipper) N/L, I have to admit that it didn't bother me either, despite no canon hints at it whatsoever, it was rather cute and besides, it was like saying Seamus/Lavender... I mean, it really doesn't add much to the plot, does it? Jo's sinking it made me wonder the reason behind that action. After all, it wasn't that unreasonable (or ofensive, paraphrasing her words) as for example, Hr/Draco. Evidently she wanted to get a message across, and I believe that we might be on the right path in guessing her way of thinking. :) ----- Arya wrote I wonder if her debunking of Nev/Luna outright means one or both of the two has a pre- ordained pairing in store for them. And as to with whom that could be, well, it's no secret Luna has had her eye on Ron, laughed at his jokes and sung his song while Neville went to the ball with Ginny and also had that little bout of rising to her rescue before the sextet left for the DoM. It's just interesting. I mean why else debunk a ship unless canon shall be written to eventually make it untrue? If neither Neville nor Luna were going to hook up (either temporarily or long term) with anyone else, then that ship is just a little romantic ideal floating idly in the waters and not bothering any canon--past, present or future. Now Udderpd I will start with one of JKR's favorites 'If they live to the end of book seven'. and it isn't a verbatim quote so let's not argue about it. You seem to have left Harry and Hermione which is quite a realistic pairing of which I approve, amongst others. But I have the lovely feeling that we will reach the end of book seven with nobody who has survived VW2 hooked up with any other survivor. Do you think that we would have twenty-five years of FanFiction? (any replies to this line should be on OTC and I hope that I do not get 'elfed' for writing it.) TTFN UdderPD 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 finwitch at yahoo.com Mon Dec 13 10:48:17 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 10:48:17 -0000 Subject: Angry Harry in HBP and OotP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119802 > Annemehr: > I admit to having finished OoP the first time feeling stunned. Though > I found Harry's outbursts painful, I didn't think of them as whiny. > Maybe it's because I interpreted Harry's state at the end of GoF > differently. Another passage, besides the one you cited, stuck with > me: "He liked it best when he was with Ron and Hermione, and they were > talking about other things, or else letting him sit in silence while > they played chess." Add that to: "When he looked back, even a month > later, Harry found he had few memories of the following days. It was > as though he had been through too much to take in any more." > > From those passages, I read numbness and shock. Finwitch: I saw Harry's numbness in GoF as shock - more importantly, the way Harry couldn't take in any more - I thought that Neville had ALWAYS been like that - numb. Still, looking at his reaction to Fudge not believing him, and the way Harry gave his Triwizard-Winnings to the Weasley twins (being so angry at Fudge he'd not want it, remember?) that 'Take it or I'll hex you' and how he'd throw it to sewers if they didn't (that's where he'd rather have thrown C. Fudge, I'd say) - I think he was *already* moving from shock to anger right there. Anger to Fudge, and at the twins for being so stupidly proud as to refuse their dream and life-purpose when he's giving it to them... And that about needing laughs... I'd say that's what he lacked all Summer, all *year* - as did Sirius, I think. They would have needed them. Yup - from shock to anger, with no laughs. He still has nothing much to laugh at - are we going to see depression next or will the twins come and pick him up for a few laughs? > Laurasia: > > This change didn't happen over night. It happened because he was > > isolated for several weeks when he needed support the most. Spending > > over a month alone is enough to send anyone from hopeful to afraid. > > > > However, we aren't shown this transitional period. > Finwitch: As I see it, Harry's *angry* response to Cornelius Fudge due to Fudge's disbelief - and threat to hex the Weasley twins if they didn't take the 1000G from him *began* this transition. When at Dursleys, Harry suppresses most of this anger, so it all piles up (as he always did!) so we wouldn't have seen him DO anything. He even begins Depression during the Summer - (Dementors affecting him)... His anger just *gets out* troughout the OOP. As well as going to depression (wishing to be at Dursleys rather than GP?) - his anger and resistance are the only things keeping him from it, but Dursleys-- I wonder. And um - since when did we get to see all July? Mainly the books begin on 31st July or later (exception on PS, but there's only the zoo incident we're *shown* about Harry - and then we're told Harry was in his cupboard until summer), August (got skipped in PS, spent at Weasleys in CoS, at Diagon Alley in PoA, Weasleys&QWC in GoF, Dursleys until 2nd August, 12 GP afterwards) and Hogwarts. You know, if Harry gets to leave the Dursleys before 31st July in HBP, it WILL be his shortest stay ever. > Laurasia: > > Angry!Harry *was* consistent. The lists of > > everything that Harry had to face up until that point are completely > > valid. If only I could have been shown the change, not just told > > about it after it had already happened. > > > > This brings up a debatable point: should we treat HP as a one giant > > book, or should it be read as 7 separate books? > > Annemehr: > I think you are right to see the series as one story. I remember JKR > saying she began by trying to allow readers to read the books > independently; thus the recaps of characters and events taking up > large percentages of the first chapter of the early books. But at > this point, trying to make the plots stand alone is going to distort > the overall tale. GoF was not as independent as the first three, and > the plot of OoP is nothing without the other books. Finwitch: I agree. It's a series where the time *moves* on (Harry's a year older in each book, and the earlier events ARE in his past). In the first three - aside from being more independent of the rest - Harry's *birthday* is mentioned and held in high importance. Then, it's *not* there in GoF nor in OoP. So yes, *one* story split into 7 books. This may not have come fully, but the hints were there: 1st book. Hagrid's comment: 7 years at Hogwarts and you won't be the same. AND it's Harry's 11th birthday, of which Hagrid makes a big deal of. END- OF-YEAR: Voldemort, though defeated by Harry, is vaporised and left as the spirit. (So, the main evil is still there). Oh, and - WHY does Harry go back to the Dursleys? 2nd book. Harry still got to keep the smallest bedroom. His magical things are locked away. He has a visitor - a house-elf - his letters are stolen, his owl (Hagrid's gift) is stuck in a cage... He gets a warning letter (the importance of a note he got in the end of the 1st book) He's rescued by the friends he made during the 1st book. He goes to Diagon Alley with different means than 1st time around - and gets lost. Hagrid saves him (and if you didn't read 1st book, wouldn't this be Deus-ex-machina? But Hagrid's there.) The shops are same, and Harry's vault is as rich as in 1st book - can't tell the difference. Since Quirrell died in 1st book, they need a new DADA teacher: Gilderoy Lockhart. -- end of year: a memory of early Tom Riddle was the one responsible; we meet Moaning Myrtle; Dobby is freed; GL is hit by his own Memory Charm; Ron's wand is exploded; Ginny is rescued from Voldemort's posession; Polyjuice is introduced.. 3rd book: We see a character mentioned in the 1st book in the TV- news - first time around he was lending a flying motor cycle, this time he's accused of murder; Harry's worried about being expelled due to the warning letter of the year before; end of 3rd book, the prophecy of Trelawney & Pettigrew's escape mean that this is a cliffhanger even if poor Sirius got away! beginning 4th: Harry's using his Godfather Sirius to scare Dursleys to be nicer. At the end of 4th book, Voldemort has returned - again a cliffie, and a bad one. ********* There are those where the character grows along the Series, and yet each novel can be read alone - (like Terry Goodkind's Sword of Truth - series. The main characters are all adults...). But in these, character growth and time passed is not *highlighted* with birthdays or other yearly celebrations! Finwitch From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Mon Dec 13 14:13:42 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 14:13:42 -0000 Subject: website SPOILERS . Who goes to Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119803 Alina wrote: > What really interests me on this point is how many muggle families > decide not to let their kids go to Hogwarts? Or maybe the better > question: how many muggle families do? Because the question of money > and tuition aside, muggle parents IMO are more likely to decide > against Hogwarts than wizarding ones. I can't imagine there would be > many willing to send their kids to a boarding school they didn't > even know existed and one they cannot inspect for themselves. > > And then, what happened to such kids? Do they go through life with > glass exploding around them when they're angry and other > unexplainable things happening and just shrugging it off? > > One last question: if a muggle-born was not sent to Hogwarts, but > upon becoming an adult made a conscious choice to live in the > wizarding rather than muggle world, would they be able to? > > I wonder what are the chances of JKR ever answering any of that... SSSusan: FWIW, Alina, there was a quite lengthy thread on this beginning with 117928, "Muggleborns choosing WW" and later permutations of "Hogwarts letters" and "Choosing Sides." You'll probably need to search with Yahoo!Mort, because you can't follow them all through one thread. Siriusly Snapey Susan From heos at virgilio.it Mon Dec 13 11:59:35 2004 From: heos at virgilio.it (chrusotoxos) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 11:59:35 -0000 Subject: Lucius betrayed? (WAS Re: JKR's cryptic answer: Who sent the Lestranges...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119804 > Jen: > > I was thinking of Lucius too, but then...Snape popped into my > > head. Snape seems the best fit as the person who overheard the > > prophecy. If so, then he would know about the Longbottoms and > > could send Bellatrix and Co. to extract info without telling them > > why. BUT, given the timeline and Dumbledore's trust of Snape, > > it's unlikely Snape could be behind both the Potters' and > > Longbottoms' attacks and DD would still have faith in him. The > > more I think about it, Lucius does seem the logical choice from > > all the DE's we've met so far. (But that saps my favorite theory > > that Lucius isn't really loyal to Voldemort. Maybe it can be > > amended to say Lucius was loyal in the first war, but liked the > > taste of power too much to take orders again ). > > > SSSusan: > Your thoughts about Lucius, especially as they pertain to his being > loyal or not-loyal to Voldy, are interesting to consider. What a wonderful thought...Lucius, the big aristocrat, the blond vampire, the overly bad guy could be treacherous to his master? Well, I think that it's a given that, if Lucius is betraying, is not to go to the good side. He's defitnely against Dumbledore. But there are many ways to be against Dumbledore. So here is a list of FACTS about Malfoy sr.: 1) He never tried to find Voldemort. Why? The ritual to restore his body didn't seem all this complex to me, if even Pettigrew could manage it Lucius surely could. 2) Lucius seems to be pretty powerful among the DE. He's one of the few to whom Voldemort talks at the end of GoF, and we know by Karkaroff that his followers only knew about the real powerful allies he had. Also, he is not punished...his loyalty must be more precious then petty revenge. 3) I still believe that Snape was surprise to know that Lucius was at the graveyard. He makes a sudden movement when Harry mentions his name, and I'm sure that was because a) he hadn't been able to go (blocked at Hogwarts), b) was really a Lucius' friend all these years and c) they had agreed not to support LV but to gain power alone (Snape only agreed to this plan in order to spy for Dumbledore, of course, but he really likes Lucius - after all, he was possibly his mentor, seeing how very much alike they act...Snape was trained well...) 4) Malfoy wouldn't gain anything by having LV back. He already has all he wants. LV means troubles. 5) His actions are directed against Muggle-born, as he's racist, but are not pro-Voldemort (cf. setting loose the Basilisk) 6) And this puzzles me: Lucius, weel connected at the Ministry and very bright, must know that a prophecy would explode if it falls down, allowing everyone to hear what's inside it (and, two prochecies actually break while he's in the Department of Misteries). So the logical thing would be to hurt Potter in some way, the prophecy slips and the DE can hear what it says. Then they kill everbody and bring HP back to be killed by Voldemort. Lucius appears to be in charge: why doesn't he do that? My guess is that he's playing a game even more dangerous than Snape's game, and will surely be killed in the end, as Voldemort is no Dumbledore: no second chances for him... Reactions? From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Mon Dec 13 14:45:14 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (Barry Arrowsmith) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 14:45:14 +0000 Subject: Longbottoms/Lestranges/Bagman/Lockhart (was: Re: JKR's cryptic answer) Message-ID: <991F7046-4D15-11D9-999F-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119806 A bit rushed at the moment, but couldn't let this thread pass without throwing in a few thoughts. Mostly it's shuffling bits of the jigsaw around seeing if any fit together. The Lestranges weren't after Neville, they were after his parents. Interesting that JKR should reveal this little snippet. It had been stated before in canon, so why the emphasis now? Though the association with prophecy is something new; previously we'd been led to believe that it was because the DEs wanted to know what had happened to Voldy. Of course, I've got a theory or two about the Longbottoms, stashed behind the arras. And in it's own meandering way it's associated with prophecies. You may remember it, it's the one that suggests that poor Alice is trying to communicate with Neville - but she's in a pretty bad way. Something keeps trying to surface in her memory - Droobles Gum? No; the bubbles from Droobles Gum? No; it's prophecy globes. The shape and appearance of one makes an association with the other. She keeps hoping Neville will make the connection. If this is a proper reading, there's something about a prophecy globe that's important for Alice to pass on to Neville. Now JKR has made it a bit more difficult; the Lestranges were not in on the secret of the Prophecy. Were the Longbottoms? Possibly so. And what is it about the Longbottoms (Frank and Alice mark you, not Neville) that touches on the Prophecy? Assuming, that is, that the Prophecy in question is the one DD replays at the end of OoP - likely, but not a total certainty. The court scenes Harry sees in the Pensieve are interesting, all sorts of theories can be cobbled together from bits we see here. That young Barty being involved in the DE attack on Frank and Alice was deliberately contrived to bring down Crouch Snr and bring in DE friendly Fudge as Minister. (Suggested last year IIRC and later expanded to include the possible ambitions of Lucius.) But there's someone else at those trials - Bagman. He's accused of passing information to DEs. Just what the information was we don't know, though it might be suggestive that DD's memories of his trial (although held on a different day) are in there with the Lestranges and Barty Jnr - both concerning the Longbottom atrocity. Years later he's also around for the Goblet conspiracy - and Winky considers him a "very bad wizard". It's DD that *chooses* which memories he puts in the Pensieve. This is during the TWT, when if DD has two neurones to rub together must suspect that there's something very strange and possibly dangerous to Harry going on. It's odds on that his does, he tells us that he uses the Pensieve to review/consider/examine memories. And it's the key people involved in the TWT that he's looking at, remembering things about. Bertha is in there too - she just happens to work for Bagman at the Ministry, and just happens to go (sent?) to the area where Voldy just happens to be hiding out and just happens to have information regarding the TWT in her head. How convenient for Voldy. So adding two and two together and coming up with the number I first thought of - "sent" the Lestranges. Well 'sent' can mean 'instructed to go' by someone in some sort of position of authority (the Voldy deputy option) or it can mean 'to point someone in the direction of' (the friendly helper option). IMO Bagman could fit the latter - I certainly think he's a Voldy supporter and maybe an actual DE. What information could Bagman have that would interest a Voldy spy already inside the Ministry? Bagman wasn't working at the Ministry then, though he had expectations - he says that Rookwood offered to help. Yet it was Old Rookwood - a friend of Bagman's father - he was passing the information to. (Are Rookwood and Old Rookwood the same person? Or two generations of the same family?) Augustus Rookwood (according to the Lexicon) worked in the Dept. of Mysteries, broke out of Azkaban, fought in the Ministry battle and probably knew more about prophecies than Bagman is ever likely to know. Is Bagman just an associate of young Barty or does he have a more significant role? And what information could he possibly have had that someone working in the MoM didn't have? While we're looking at the Longbottom affair - they are supposed to have lost their memories/sanity while under torture. All very possible. But I keep remembering who is the maestro of the Obliviate! spell - Lockhart. A devious, ambitious, vain, unscrupulous creep. Zapping helpless people would be just up his street. Could he have been involved? If he was it would imply that the DEs thought it best that the Longbottoms didn't remember something important - besides the identity of their torturers, that is. I never have been able to figure out why Bella didn't kill them, it's unlikely it would have bothered her much. OK; there's the bits. Can anyone find any way to fit 'em together? Kneasy From Vivamus at TaprootTech.com Mon Dec 13 15:43:48 2004 From: Vivamus at TaprootTech.com (Vivamus) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 10:43:48 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: A comment on SHIPs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200412131044571.SM01080@devbox> No: HPFGUIDX 119807 > > afiveouncebird: > > As we all know by now, JKR recently updated her site. In her > > 'rumours' section you find out that Neville and Luna are > not getting > > together (See > > http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/rumours_view.cfm?id=24 ). > I think > > she is also implying that the H/G and R/H SHIPs won't work out > either. > > > mcmaxslb: > In sinking the Neville/Luna ship JKR has also dealt a blow to > both Ron/Hermione and Harry/Ginny. For now Neville and Luna > are realistic alternatives for Ron and Ginny respectively. Vivamus: I don't think her quote implies that at all. I read it as saying, essentially, "It is safer to tell you about Harry/Luna than about Hermione's relationships with Ron or Harry, because there doesn't seem to be as much fan blood on the ground defending one ship or the other. So, I will tell you about this one, but not tell you about the other ones." Here is her exact quote: "The Luna/Neville shippers are much less vehement and scary than the Harry/Hermione, Ron/Hermione tribes, so I hope I won't receive too much hate mail for quashing this rumour." (continuing, she answers the Neville/Luna question.) I think her other quotes on the ships are pretty good indicators of what she is thinking along those lines, so I wouldn't jump to conclusions too quickly from the above quote. Vivamus, who thought on first reading of book one that the little girl with Mrs. Weasley was curious about Harry for a reason From willsonkmom at msn.com Mon Dec 13 15:47:34 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 15:47:34 -0000 Subject: Longbottoms/Lestranges/Bagman/Lockhart (was: Re: JKR's cryptic answer) In-Reply-To: <991F7046-4D15-11D9-999F-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119808 Kneasy wrote: (and Potioncat snips) Something keeps trying to surface in her memory - Droobles Gum? No; the bubbles from Droobles Gum? No; it's prophecy globes. The shape and appearance of one makes an association with the other. She keeps hoping Neville will make the connection. If this is a proper reading, there's something about a prophecy globe that's important for Alice to pass on to Neville. Potioncat: I've never associated the bubbles with the orbs, but it works. And we've seen something else that floats like a bubble, but is described as an orb: Lupin's boggart. I wouldn't think Alice would know his boggart, but is the bubble a prophecy orb or a full moon? Or both? From stonehenge.orders at verizon.net Mon Dec 13 15:56:18 2004 From: stonehenge.orders at verizon.net (kjirstem) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 15:56:18 -0000 Subject: Birthdays on website Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119809 I looked back at the record (on Mugglenet, is there one around here somewhere?) of JKR's website birthday wishes and realized that most of the recipients are generally considered to be "good". The list is: Neville (July 30) Harry (July 31) Ginny (Aug 11) Percy (Aug 22) Hermione (Sept 19) McGonagall (Oct 4) Flitwick (Oct 17) Molly Weasley(Oct 30) Bill Weasley(Nov 29) Hagrid (Dec 6) Charlie Weasley (Dec 12) I don't recall much discussion about whether any of these people are ESE, though I could easily have missed it. Percy is the only one whose good/evil status I've questioned. I know we only have 6 months of birthdays so far, but I wonder if this can be taken as an indication that Percy will turn out to be a good guy in the end. Even if he is an obnoxious git. kjirstem - who has almost the same birthday as Charlie and thinks his job is the coolest From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Mon Dec 13 17:08:22 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 17:08:22 -0000 Subject: Longbottoms/Lestranges/Bagman/Lockhart (was: Re: JKR's cryptic answer) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119810 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > > Potioncat: > I've never associated the bubbles with the orbs, but it works. And > we've seen something else that floats like a bubble, but is > described as an orb: Lupin's boggart. I wouldn't think Alice would > know his boggart, but is the bubble a prophecy orb or a full moon? > Or both? Good question. The whole subject of repetitive globes/orbs in the books was given more attention after an off-site exchange with Lyn Mangiameli; he thought it needed bringing up so I did (109868). And yes, Lupin's Boggart did get a passing mention in this respect last month. But so far it's just a nice, neat little theory. Proving it is gonna be something else again. Kneasy From caseylane at wideopenwest.com Mon Dec 13 17:10:36 2004 From: caseylane at wideopenwest.com (Casey) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 17:10:36 -0000 Subject: A comment on SHIPs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119811 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "templar1112002" wrote: > > ******My first thought after I read her explanation was that she was > also sinking Harry/Luna. I had similar thoughts when she sank > Hermione/Draco, my mind went straight to Ginny/Draco being sunk, too. > > As for Hr/R, IMO she started drilling 'visible' holes on that ship > in OoTP. If Ron makes a drastic make-over, those holes could be > patched up, but I'm afraid that Hermione's focus will be on someone > else by then (my happiness doesn't depend on Ron's goal-keeping > abilities'). Plus, there were some sharks circling around it, one > of them actually got another row of teeth this past Dec-10th: Luna > Lovegood (Weasley is her King) lol. See, I think Luna is a good thing for Ron/Hr. It might wake Ron up to the boy/girl thing he seems to still be clueless about. Also it might make Hermoine decide to be more proactive in her and Ron's relationship. Not wait for Ron to make the move but take action herself. I firmly believe that R/Hr will be the final ship even as I don't see a clearly defined ship for Harry. At no point did I think JK was putting to rest the H/Hr or R/Hr ships, just commenting on the rabidness of the "tribes". Casey From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Mon Dec 13 17:11:59 2004 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 17:11:59 -0000 Subject: Birthdays on website In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119812 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "kjirstem" wrote: > > I looked back at the record (on Mugglenet, is there one around here > somewhere?) of JKR's website birthday wishes and realized that most of > the recipients are generally considered to be "good". The list is: > > Neville (July 30) > Harry (July 31) > Ginny (Aug 11) > Percy (Aug 22) > Hermione (Sept 19) > McGonagall (Oct 4) > Flitwick (Oct 17) > Molly Weasley(Oct 30) > Bill Weasley(Nov 29) > Hagrid (Dec 6) > Charlie Weasley (Dec 12) > > I don't recall much discussion about whether any of these people are > ESE, though I could easily have missed it. Percy is the only one > whose good/evil status I've questioned. I know we only have 6 months > of birthdays so far, but I wonder if this can be taken as an > indication that Percy will turn out to be a good guy in the end. > > Even if he is an obnoxious git. > > kjirstem - who has almost the same birthday as Charlie and thinks his > job is the coolest Hickengruendler: In my opinion, yes it can. After all, there is only half a year left (some time between 5 and 7 months, depending when exactly JKR decided to add birthdays on her website), and it seems impossible, that none of the villains had a birthday so far. Besides, wishing Umbridge, Voldemort or even Draco a Happy Birthday would really be a bit odd. I would say this makes it 95% sure that Percy is a good guy, too. I say 95% because I wouldn't put it past JKR to add Percy's birthday as a red-herring on the list, so that we all trust him and are surprised, when he turns out to be a villain after all. But I don't really think so. IMO, Percy is too straightforward to be a real villain, anyway. It's not that he made a secret where his loyalities lied in OotP. A villain would have seemingly joined Dumbledore's group to report everything to Fudge. Hickengruendler, who's really hoping for Snape's birthday, because he thinks that Snape is a good guy as well. From dolis5657 at yahoo.com Mon Dec 13 17:45:19 2004 From: dolis5657 at yahoo.com (dcgmck) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 17:45:19 -0000 Subject: JKR's cryptic answer. Who sent the Lestranges to the Longbottoms? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119813 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "littleleahstill" wrote: > > Neri wrote: (massive snipping) > > The Barty Jr possibility again raises the "something rotten in the > Ministry" scenario. > [snip] Bertha told LV that Barty Jnr was 'a faithful deatheater', so somewhere along the line she had heard something about Master Barty beyond his grovelling behaviour at the trial. > > Leah Having looked through all the succeeding posts and not seen anything along the lines I'm thinking, I've come back to this thought: Don't we learn in GoF that Bertha Jorkin actually sees Master Barty one evening when she goes to the Crouch home with papers for Crouch, Sr.? If Bagman is, indeed, ESE and learns of this, (because Bertha never could keep her mouth shut on juicy stuff,) her boss could easily have suggested a possible vacation side destination en route to her relatives. As far as rumors abounding without positive source identification, think Lord of the Rings (extended version forthcoming) wherein rumors of a dark power lurking in Mirkwood spread through a variety of sources long before Sauron was revealed to have returned, simply because of the consequences of his reflexive evil foraging. Likewise the Forbidden Forest is alive with rumors of a dark terror when VapoMort is feeding on unicorns to sustain himself in PS/SS. Bad news doesn't need an evil conspiracy to be disseminated, just some real atrocities occurring. From sylviablundell at aol.com Mon Dec 13 18:20:44 2004 From: sylviablundell at aol.com (ladyramkin2001) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 18:20:44 -0000 Subject: Birthdays on website Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119814 As a loyal member ofthe Richard III Society, I notice that Percy's birthday, August 22nd, falls on the anniversary of the battle of Bosworth. Richard was killed and his cause was lost due largely to the treachery of one man, Lord Stanley. I only hope history isnt going to repeat itself, with Percy as the betrayer. Incidentally, Percy was the surname of Northamberland, who consolidated Richard's defeat by standing on the sidelines, doing nothing. Sylvia (ain't it the truth, Carol!) From annemehr at yahoo.com Mon Dec 13 18:28:47 2004 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 18:28:47 -0000 Subject: Longbottoms/Lestranges/Bagman/Lockhart (was: Re: JKR's cryptic answer) In-Reply-To: <991F7046-4D15-11D9-999F-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119815 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Barry Arrowsmith wrote: > But there's > someone else at those trials - Bagman. > > He's accused of passing information to DEs. Just what the information > was we don't know, though it might be suggestive that DD's memories of > his trial (although held on a different day) are in there with the > Lestranges and Barty Jnr - both concerning the Longbottom atrocity. > Years later he's also around for the Goblet conspiracy - and Winky > considers him a "very bad wizard". There's definitely a piece of the puzzle that Jo hasn't given us yet. As you wonder later, "what information could Bagman have that would interest a Voldy spy already in the Ministry?" Not only what information could a young Quidditch star obtain, but what could it be that he could plausibly *think* was to help the good side but was really for the bad side? It can't be information on the doings of either side, because then he'd *know* that Rookwood was working for the opposite side. It has to be something they'd both want, like the plans to a new type of weapon or something. What, he'd discovered new properties of bludgers that make them useful in a war? It's also (barely) possible, of course, that Bagman was merely the conduit for information from some unknown agent to Rookwood, but that just creates the need for more plausible deniability: Bagman would have to be able to claim the unknown agent was not who he seemed, as well. And why would this unknown agent need a courier such as Bagman, when there are so many ways to communicate in the wizarding world? Annemehr From wulfkub at wulfkub.com Mon Dec 13 18:34:14 2004 From: wulfkub at wulfkub.com (Amanda) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 13:34:14 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Birthdays on website References: Message-ID: <003c01c4e142$5b0a2860$0402a8c0@carolina.rr.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119816 > I looked back at the record (on Mugglenet, is there one around here > somewhere?) of JKR's website birthday wishes and realized that most of > the recipients are generally considered to be "good". The list is: > > Neville (July 30) > Harry (July 31) > Ginny (Aug 11) > Percy (Aug 22) > Hermione (Sept 19) > McGonagall (Oct 4) > Flitwick (Oct 17) > Molly Weasley(Oct 30) > Bill Weasley(Nov 29) > Hagrid (Dec 6) > Charlie Weasley (Dec 12) Kethryn now, Just thought I would point out that Ron's birthday is sometime in between Febuary 18 and March 17. If I were to guess, I would guess that he is an early March baby. Keth From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Mon Dec 13 18:45:16 2004 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 18:45:16 -0000 Subject: Birthdays on website In-Reply-To: <003c01c4e142$5b0a2860$0402a8c0@carolina.rr.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119817 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Amanda" wrote: > > Kethryn now, > > Just thought I would point out that Ron's birthday is sometime in between > Febuary 18 and March 17. If I were to guess, I would guess that he is an > early March baby. > > Keth Hickengruendler: A very early march baby, in fact. His birthday is March 1st. JKR said this several times in chats and/or interviews. If you search at Quick- Quotes-Quill, you will find of one her statements. From willsonkmom at msn.com Mon Dec 13 19:11:44 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 19:11:44 -0000 Subject: Birthdays on website In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119818 > Hickengruendler: > > A very early march baby, in fact. His birthday is March 1st. JKR said this several times in chats and/or interviews. If you search at Quick-Quotes-Quill, you will find of one her statements. Potioncat: The Lexicon has a calendar of important dates in the Timelines section. Here is a link to the calendar that includes birthdays. It is updated as JKR posts new information (And we all thank Steve and his staff very much!) http://www.hp-lexicon.org/timelines/timeline-year-calendar.html Potioncat From foxmoth at qnet.com Mon Dec 13 19:15:09 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 19:15:09 -0000 Subject: Longbottoms/Lestranges/Bagman/Lockhart (was: Re: JKR's cryptic answer) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119819 Kneasy: > > But there's > > someone else at those trials - Bagman. > > > > He's accused of passing information to DEs. Just what the information was we don't know, though it might be suggestive that DD's memories of his trial (although held on a different day) are in there with the Lestranges and Barty Jnr - both concerning the Longbottom atrocity. Years later he's also around for the Goblet conspiracy - and Winky considers him a "very bad wizard".<< Annemehr: > There's definitely a piece of the puzzle that Jo hasn't given us yet. As you wonder later, "what information could Bagman have that would interest a Voldy spy already in the Ministry?" < Pippin: Bagman, as an internationally famous quidditch star, might have been developed as a useful source of information about foreign ministrys. To tell you the truth, I thought the whole Bagman/spy subplot was a sly reference to the old 'I Spy' television series. Robert Culp and Bill Cosby played cold war era secret agents whose cover was professional tennis. As visiting celebrities they could cross the iron curtain, get invited to diplomatic functions and serve as conduits of information and in aid of the occasional defector (generally young and female.) Pippin From slgazit at sbcglobal.net Mon Dec 13 19:17:44 2004 From: slgazit at sbcglobal.net (slgazit) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 19:17:44 -0000 Subject: Hermione's age In-Reply-To: <20041213022856.32457.qmail@web53110.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119820 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Juli wrote: > > So, Hermione was nearly 12 when she entered Hogwarts, > when Ron and Harry had just turned 11, After 5 years, > Harry and Ron turn 16 and Hermione will turn 17 on > September. So this means she will be of legal age. > Will she take apparition lessons over the summer? I > can't wait to see if she learns how to, she could > apparate at Privet Drive and make Harry a bit happier. I think you have to be 17 to start apparation lessons, so she should not be able to. For instance, Cedric Diggory could not apparate in GoF but was already 17 by Oct. 31 (or he could nor have been able to put in his name into the goblet), so his birthday must have been sometime between Sept. and Oct. but he could not yet apparate. Perhaps British people could answer this question better - this may be the same rules as those for driving in the U.K. Anyone can answer that? Salit From tmgm1012 at alltel.net Mon Dec 13 18:39:28 2004 From: tmgm1012 at alltel.net (Tracie) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 13:39:28 -0500 Subject: Birthdays on website References: <003c01c4e142$5b0a2860$0402a8c0@carolina.rr.com> Message-ID: <007801c4e143$153352c0$6401a8c0@garymz54a1w88s> No: HPFGUIDX 119821 > Kethryn: > Just thought I would point out that Ron's birthday is sometime in between > Febuary 18 and March 17. If I were to guess, I would guess that he is an > early March baby. Ron's birthday is March 1. "Tracie" From lea_petra at myway.com Mon Dec 13 19:30:10 2004 From: lea_petra at myway.com (mari) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 14:30:10 -0500 (EST) Subject: Lucius betrayed? (WAS Re: JKR's cryptic answer: Who sent the Lestranges...) Message-ID: <20041213193010.DE3A83A30@mprdmxin.myway.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119822 chrusotoxos: >1) He never tried to find Voldemort. Why? The ritual to restore his >body didn't seem all this complex to me, if even Pettigrew could >manage it Lucius surely could. Mari: It's a good possibility that to Lucius being a Death Eater was like being a member of the Thule society. (A group that studied the occult and spawned much Nazism, Adolf Hitler was a member). He may have joined because: 1. He found many wizards shared his prejudice. 2. He had relatives in the group. 3. Thought it a great way to gain his personal power. I think at sometime, Lucius realized that Especially if Regulus Black had just been killed. Lucius would have stayed on as a way to protect himself and his family. At the same time hedging his bets. If LV did succeed then he would be in a very good place, power-wise. If LV falls, Lucius could always claim he was forced to join. LV does fall and Lucius does nothing, but dig out an old diary. Then only after it is rumored that LV has returned. With LV gone, Lucius built up a very respectable face to the public. He was finally getting the power he was craving when he was younger, without LV. When LV is rumored to come back. Lucius digs out Tom Riddle's diary to make it look like he was thinking aobut LV all this time. LV probally knows full well this is what Lucius is doing. The question could be: Why doesn't Voldemort punish Lucius for such behavior? Maybe the Dark Lord needs something the Lucius has. chrusotoxos: >6) And this puzzles me: Lucius, well connected at the Ministry and >very bright, must know that a prophecy would explode if it falls >down, allowing everyone to hear what's inside it (and, two prophecies >actually break while he's in the Department of Misteries). So the >logical thing would be to hurt Potter in some way, the prophecy slips >and the DE can hear Mari: As well connected and smart as he is, he can't know everything. Another possibility is that LV did not want all of his DE to hear it. I agree that he is playing a more danerous game than Snape is. Snape has the protection of Dumbledore, but Lucius has nothing. From stonehenge.orders at verizon.net Mon Dec 13 20:06:20 2004 From: stonehenge.orders at verizon.net (kjirstem) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 20:06:20 -0000 Subject: website SPOILERS . Who goes to Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119823 > > Alla wrote: > > > > > > I did not see anybody commenting on this piece of info on JKR > website > > yet. > > Lexicon Steve wrote: > > What I immediately noticed is that she only half-way answered the > question. So did Stan Shunpike go to Hogwarts? How common is it for > people NOT to go? All this tells us is that the invitation goes out. > What percentage of people say yes? If almost everyone says yes, then > the total number of school age Wizarding children in Britain is > frightfully small -- at most a thousand, as per Jo's comment. That's > the size of a small high school in the United States, and most > communities have a number of such high schools. > > If, on the other hand, most families turn down the position in favor > of having the kids go into a trade, then the Wizarding World is a > bit more reasonable size. > > I should have rephrased the question...and I spent a month writing > those questions, hoping to avoid this sort of thing! > kjirstem: IMO there was another variable left open by the phrasing of JKR's answer, which was kids who show magic ability *after* the age of 11. She says, "Everyone who shows magical ability before their eleventh birthday will automatically gain a place at Hogwarts;..." I vaguely recall JKR saying something about magical ability usually showing up in young kids, but surely there are some kids whose ability isn't shown until after their eleventh birthday. What happens to them? Neville only showed his ability under pretty extreme conditions IMO. I wonder what would have happened if his family hadn't been so bent on testing him to destruction. From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Mon Dec 13 20:26:04 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 20:26:04 -0000 Subject: JKR's cryptic answer: "Who sent the Lestranges to the Longbottoms?" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119824 dcgmck: > Barty, Jr. sprang to mind for me as well when I first read JKR's > latest teasers. Though young, he put me very much in mind of Tom > Riddle at Hogwarts: accomplished yet dissatisfied with the > recognition (and lack thereof). He is clearly fueled by an enormous > amount of hate, especially for his father. This combination of > talent and animosity makes him an excellent choice as favored pet > for LV. It also puts him in perfect position to discredit Crouch, > Sr. in a way unavailable to anyone else. > > Discrediting Crouch, Sr. and accepting imprisonment in Azkaban not > only proves his loyalty to his evil master, it also falls in line > with the idea of torture as the preferred option over death. > I can easily see it being Barty's idea to make use of the sadistic > Bella to torture the Longbottoms. There doesn't seem to have been > any effort to conceal the act, assuring that they would be caught, > he would be tried, and his father would leave himself open to > public censure for somehow allowing his only son to either turn out > badly or be unjustly imprisoned. SSSusan: Just a question of clarification. Barty, Jr., in his trial scene, was nothing more than a kid screaming, crying and begging his father to spare him, pleading and denying his guilt. He didn't go off calmly or willingly, declaring loyalty to Voldy, the way Bella, for instance, went. Are you arguing that this was totally an act on BJ's part, his attempt to try to gain sympathy for himself and/or generate an outcry against his father? Siriusly Snapey Susan From kirsty_lowson at yahoo.com Mon Dec 13 21:05:04 2004 From: kirsty_lowson at yahoo.com (Kirsty Lowson) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 21:05:04 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Lupin's boggart (Was Lestranges/Longbottoms etc) AND DD's delay PS/SS In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041213210504.34149.qmail@web53708.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119826 Potioncat: > I've never associated the bubbles with the > orbs, but it works. And > we've seen something else that floats like a > bubble, but is > described as an orb: Lupin's boggart. I > wouldn't think Alice would > know his boggart, but is the bubble a prophecy > orb or a full moon? > Or both? Kirsty: PoA page 256 (UK hardback): "...did you realise that the Boggart changed into the moon when it saw me?" [Lupin asking how Hermione worked out he was a werewolf] So unless this is deceptive!Lupin at work (and I tend to take characters at face value, naive I know but these are supposed to be childrens' books to some extent), it's not a prophecy orb. On DD's delay once he'd gone to London in PS/SS: Aberdeen is some 550 miles north of London (as the thestral flies), so even though a flight on an aeroplane is barely 1 1/2 hours, it indeed took time -- and we've no comparison of speed of thestrals/planes. Kirsty ===== "If men are always wrong, what does that mean when he tells a woman she looks beautiful?" ___________________________________________________________ Win a castle for NYE with your mates and Yahoo! Messenger http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From lea_petra at myway.com Mon Dec 13 21:14:20 2004 From: lea_petra at myway.com (mari) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 16:14:20 -0500 (EST) Subject: Lucius betrayed? (WAS Re: JKR's cryptic answer: Who sent the Lestranges...) Message-ID: <20041213211420.0C4373975@mprdmxin.myway.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119827 Half of my arguements disappeared! Here they are again. Hopefully. chrusotoxos: >1) He never tried to find Voldemort. Why? The ritual to restore his >body didn't seem all this complex to me, if even Pettigrew could >manage it Lucius surely could. Mari: It's a good possibility that to Lucius being a Death Eater was like being a member of the Thule society. (A group that studied the occult and spawned much Nazism, Adolf Hitler was a member). He may have joined because: 1. He found many wizards shared his prejudice. 2. He had relatives in the group. 3. Thought it a great way to gain his personal power. I think at sometime, Lucius realized that Voldemort was more interesting in his own power, than promoting the ideals of the group. Lucius may have thought to leave, but then thought he would be safer staying. Especially if Regulus Black had just been killed. Lucius would have stayed on as a way to protect himself and his family. At the same time hedging his bets. If LV did succeed then he would be in a very good place, power-wise. If LV falls, Lucius could always claim he was forced to join. LV does fall and Lucius does nothing, but dig out an old diary. Then only after it is rumored that LV has returned. With LV gone, Lucius built up a very respectable face to the public. He was finally getting the power he was craving when he was younger, without LV. When LV is rumored to have come back. Lucius digs out Tom Riddle's diary to make it look like he was thinking aobut LV all this time. LV probally knows full well this is what Lucius is doing. The question could be: Why doesn't Voldemort punish Lucius for such behavior? Maybe the Dark Lord needs something the Lucius has. I'm thinking something abstract here, like connections in the Ministry. Not an actual object. chrusotoxos: >6) And this puzzles me: Lucius, well connected at the Ministry and >very bright, must know that a prophecy would explode if it falls >down, allowing everyone to hear what's inside it (and, two prophecies >actually break while he's in the Department of Misteries). So the >logical thing would be to hurt Potter in some way, the prophecy slips >and the DE can hear Mari: As well connected and smart as he is, he can't know everything. Another possibility is that LV did not want all of his DE to hear it. I agree that he is playing a more danerous game than Snape is. Snape has the protection of Dumbledore, but Lucius has nothing. From javalorum at yahoo.ca Mon Dec 13 21:37:45 2004 From: javalorum at yahoo.ca (javalorum) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 21:37:45 -0000 Subject: Angry Harry in HBP? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119828 Thanks everybody for the discussion. That enlightened me quite a bit in understanding the characters, or at least, looking at it more from other angles. Well, I guess I should have said in my previous post that I always like children's literature. A good children's book is certainly no less than adults' in terms of giving insights and wisdom about life, only be told in a more playful and subtle way. And, I don't know if it's just a children's literature thing, or I should say all good books should have, is the positive message. No matter how dark the story is, the spirits can't be dark. Obviously Harry's behavior is understandable. He did go through a lot. I agree that the 5th book HAS to be read together with the previous 4. But the problem is it should also be looked at as a stand alone book. Maybe I'm just asking too much here. But I thought, in order for a book to be outstanding (at least worthy of Harry Potter book's quanlity), and a character to be outstanding (at least worthy of the younger Harry), the book has to show Harry's qualities in a understandable yet remarkable manner. It's almost like you know this awesome kid, and you think, "wow, I can't wait to see what great things he's going to do when he gets older, and what a great person he's going to become". And he turned out to be just another self- obsorbed teenager. I know he has way more obstacles than normal people, but hey, for one, majority of readers are normal, and young, it's tricky to make them understand something that farfetched (though I'm sure a fraction of readers will); and secondly, I just wished someone like the older version of the young Harry would be able to struggle and overcome the obstacles instead of just being self- obsorbed all the time. It's kind of like LOTR:two towers, when facing the impossiblity of survival, the heros still say (and believe, more imporantly) "there is hope". Obviously Harry's a lot younger and less wise, but I guess it was just my "but he was such a great kid before, he's gonna become a real hero" that got me anticipated, and later disappointed. Well, not every great person (or character) has to be great all the time. But I guess ootp was just a downturn for the HP saga. Hopefully this is a transition period and he'll be a bit different in the 6th book. But the reason I was kinda thinking ootp reflecting the author's mood was because in this book, everybody and everything, especially the grownups, revolve around Harry and that's kind of unusual for a children's book. If the whole set up is done in a unrealistic way, just for explaining Harry's bad behavior, then there's not much chance it'll change in the future. I guess what I'm trying to say is, I don't think half of the reasons that got Harry angry are logical or understandable at the first place. And that's why after finishing the last few chapters of the book all I could say was a big "huh?". All of this, the whole plot curve, ended up being on Dumbledore's old age and miscalculation? He doesn't understand the first thing about teenagers and he calls himself an educator? And of course, I don't think this is Dumbledore's fault. He's just written that way in ootp. Anyway, thanks everybody for giving me a great chance to talk about Harry Potter. I do enjoy the books and am thankful for their existence. :) Java From gryffindor.phan at gmail.com Mon Dec 13 21:48:22 2004 From: gryffindor.phan at gmail.com (Arya) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 21:48:22 -0000 Subject: A comment on SHIPs In-Reply-To: <20041213103924.45585.qmail@web25305.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119829 I, Arya, first wrote: It's just interesting. I mean why else debunk a ship unless canon shall be written to eventually make it untrue? If neither Neville nor Luna were going to hook up (either temporarily or long term) with anyone else, then that ship is just a little romantic ideal floating idly in the waters and not bothering any canon--past, present or future. Udderpd then wrote: I will start with one of JKR's favorites 'If they live to the end of book seven'. and it isn't a verbatim quote so let's not argue about it. (snipped) --------------- Arya again: You're right of course. I should have included Death as a potential LT ship for Neville and/or Luna. Either way, I still hold to thinking the debunking means Neville and/or Luna have a certain fate (other partner, death, Dementor Kiss, falling into Mount Doom...)decreed for them by JKR that both enabled her to debunk and motivated her. Arya From gryffindor.phan at gmail.com Mon Dec 13 21:50:09 2004 From: gryffindor.phan at gmail.com (Arya) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 21:50:09 -0000 Subject: Hermione's age In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119830 "slgazit" wrote: I think you have to be 17 to start apparation lessons, so she should not be able to. For instance, Cedric Diggory could not apparate in GoF but was already 17 by Oct. 31 (or he could nor have been able to put in his name into the goblet), so his birthday must have been sometime between Sept. and Oct. but he could not yet apparate. Perhaps British people could answer this question better - this may be the same rules as those for driving in the U.K. Anyone can answer that?------------------ How do you know Cedric could not Apparate?? Arya From gryffindor.phan at gmail.com Mon Dec 13 21:58:41 2004 From: gryffindor.phan at gmail.com (Arya) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 21:58:41 -0000 Subject: Hermione's age In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119831 > > "slgazit" wrote: > I think you have to be 17 to start apparation lessons, so she should > not be able to. For instance, Cedric Diggory could not apparate in GoF > but was already 17 by Oct. 31 (or he could nor have been able to put > in his name into the goblet), so his birthday must have been sometime > between Sept. and Oct. but he could not yet apparate. > > Perhaps British people could answer this question better - this may be > the same rules as those for driving in the U.K. Anyone can answer > that? ------------------ > I asked: > How do you know Cedric could not Apparate?? ----------- Now to answer my own question: Ahh, you're thinking of him not Apparating to the QWC over the summer before the year began? Hmmm. Well, in looking it up, Cedric, that year, was only a sixth year (he was named Quidditch Captain and Seeker to the team in PoA when he was a fitth year according to the Lexicon). So Cedric would have been 16 during the summer when he had to take the Portkey with his father. He then, like Angelina, would have turned 17 early in the year to make him eligible for the TWT. Basically, I don't think Cedric not Apparating when he was 16 that summer tells us anything about how and when one can learn Apparition. Arya From greatelderone at yahoo.com Mon Dec 13 22:04:41 2004 From: greatelderone at yahoo.com (greatelderone) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 22:04:41 -0000 Subject: Longbottoms/Lestranges/Bagman/Lockhart (was: Re: JKR's cryptic answer) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119832 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "annemehr" wrote: > There's definitely a piece of the puzzle that Jo hasn't given us yet. > As you wonder later, "what information could Bagman have that would > interest a Voldy spy already in the Ministry?" GEO: Why does Rookwood need a reason? He was gathering human intelligence for Voldemort, no doubtly he recruited Bagman because he didn't have someone high up in the quidditch teams to spy and gather information for his master. From udderpd at yahoo.co.uk Mon Dec 13 22:12:49 2004 From: udderpd at yahoo.co.uk (udder_pen_dragon) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 22:12:49 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Hermione's age In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041213221249.78923.qmail@web25308.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119833 "slgazit" wrote: I think you have to be 17 to start apparation lessons, so she should not be able to. For instance, Cedric Diggory could not apparate in GoF but was already 17 by Oct. 31 (or he could nor have been able to put in his name into the goblet), so his birthday must have been sometime between Sept. and Oct. but he could not yet apparate. Perhaps British people could answer this question better - this may be the same rules as those for driving in the U.K. Anyone can answer that?------------------ Arya then asked; How do you know Cedric could not Apparate?? Now UdderPD UK Adult ed HP and the GoF Ch 6 'The Portkey'. Amos Diggory says to Arthur W. "Had to get up at two........... i'll be glad when he's got his Apparation test. I think that this means Cedric can't Apparate it certainly means that he isn't allowed to. Also to answer Slgazit's question yes it is fairly similar to the UK driving test procedure and you can't learn to drive until after your seventeenth birthday. TTFN UdderPD 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 sevenhundredandthirteen at yahoo.com Mon Dec 13 22:19:46 2004 From: sevenhundredandthirteen at yahoo.com (sevenhundredandthirteen) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 22:19:46 -0000 Subject: Angry Harry in HBP and OotP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119834 > > Laurasia: > > > This change didn't happen over night. It happened because he was > > > isolated for several weeks when he needed support the most. > Spending > > > over a month alone is enough to send anyone from hopeful to > afraid. > > > > > > However, we aren't shown this transitional period. > Finwitch: > When at Dursleys, Harry suppresses most of this anger, so it all > piles up (as he always did!) so we wouldn't have seen him DO anything. > He even begins Depression during the Summer - (Dementors affecting > him)... His anger just *gets out* troughout the OOP. > > And um - since when did we get to see all July? Laurasia: Since when was July so important? The reason why we never *needed* to see July before because it was always some no-man's land where not much changed. The July between GoF and OotP was when Harry underwent his most dramatic change in the entire story. Harry didn't have to become angry. He wasn't, IMO, angry at the end of GoF- in shock, definitely, but this shock was yet to manifest itself. If he had support, it could have manifested itself in a much more constructive and healing form. If he had received proper support and counselling he would have better accepted the situation and, IMO, not become so volatile (maybe found complete resolution). Because of this, the turning point for his character *isn't* in the graveyard, it's the time that begins as soon as he walks away from platform 9 3/4. The thing that makes Harry angry *isn't* seeing his friend murdered, it's being left alone to dwell on it for several weeks. What we see at the start of OotP is when Harry's angry culminates. What we don't see are the events that left him so desperate. Those events (the weeks spent alone) was what ended up driving Harry the entire book (he still blames Dumbledore for leaving him all alone at the end of the book). There is reference to the weeks between GoF and OotP, but no first hand experience for the reader. And, IMO, because Harry's state of mind was ambiguous at the end of GoF (still in shock, yet to really find and outlet) it *could* have gone either way, according to circumstances. He *could* have become angry (by being abandoned), he *could* have found healing (with support). This is why the transitional period is intrinsic to the story- it lets us know why way he's going to swing. If Harry's state of mind was less ambiguous at the end of GoF, this transitional period would not have been so essential. But it *is* ambiguous. At best, Harry only has hope- a possibility, not a certainty. At worst, he's in a numb shock. Harry's eventual state of mind wasn't dictated by Voldemort's actions in the graveyard, it was dictated by Dumbledore's actions in the school holidays. (Go on, flame me! It was *Dumbledore's* fault, not Voldemort's. The confrontation between DD and Harry, is, after all, the final battle in OotP. Taking place *after* the showdown between V'mort and Harry.) I don't care if we never saw July in any of the other books. When July is the most important month in Harry's life, JKR should break trend. ~<(Laurasia)>~ From BrwNeil at aol.com Mon Dec 13 22:23:13 2004 From: BrwNeil at aol.com (BrwNeil at aol.com) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 17:23:13 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: A comment on SHIPs Message-ID: <9e.1baeb6a4.2eef7051@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119835 In a message dated 12/13/2004 4:54:00 PM Eastern Standard Time, gryffindor.phan at gmail.com writes: You're right of course. I should have included Death as a potential LT ship for Neville and/or Luna. Either way, I still hold to thinking the debunking means Neville and/or Luna have a certain fate (other partner, death, Dementor Kiss, falling into Mount Doom...)decreed for them by JKR that both enabled her to debunk and motivated her. Arya You could be correct, but I think it is more a case of JKR just not liking a subject thread and wanting it ended. She doesn't like Voldemort being called Voldie. She can't see how people can possible like someone as nasty as Draco Malfoy. She has made it rather clear he is not going to become good. And it turned her stomach to think that anyone could ever consider a relationship between Draco and Hermione. I think Nevelle/Luna is just another one of those places she just, doesn't want people to go. Neil [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Mon Dec 13 22:42:31 2004 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 22:42:31 -0000 Subject: A comment on SHIPs In-Reply-To: <9e.1baeb6a4.2eef7051@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119836 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, BrwNeil at a... wrote: > > > You could be correct, but I think it is more a case of JKR just not liking a > subject thread and wanting it ended. She doesn't like Voldemort being > called Voldie. Hickengruendler: No, she said it was a joke and that she found it funny that fandom calls him Voldie. It's on her website, either in the FAQ or the rumours section. > She can't see how people can possible like someone as nasty as > Draco Malfoy. She has made it rather clear he is not going to become good. And > it turned her stomach to think that anyone could ever consider a relationship > between Draco and Hermione. Hickengruendler: That's true, but I think there is more to it than simply not liking Draco or the ship. IMO, she is worried. She is worried that all the girls (and it are mostly girls) who think Draco is good beneath his exterior and just needs someone to love him, will react the same way in real life with bad boys. And I think she knows what she's talking about, having made bad experiences during her first marriage. Of course that's just my opinion on the subject, but than, I can't understand anyway why anyone would like that little monster Malfoy. > I think Nevelle/Luna is just another one of > those places she just, doesn't want people to go. > Hickengruendler: And here I disagree again. Look how carefully she was to shoot it down, compared to her harshness when she "destroyed" Draco/Hermione. She isn't appalled by this, she just doesn't think that they are compatible. Also, I find it extremely funny, how many shippers (not only here) interpreted her statement the way that it would fit their ship. I have read all of thes following statements: She shot down Neville/Luna, that's a blow towards Harry/Ginny and Ron/Hermione as well. Because now Luna is free for Ron and Neville for Ginny, leaving Harry and Hermione. Yay. She shot down Neville/Luna, that's a blow towards Harry/Hermione, because now Luna is free for Harry. That leaves Hermione for Ron. Yay. She shot down Neville/Luna, because she wanted to tell us that neither of them will hook up with anyone, leaving the way for Harry/Ginny and Ron/Hermione. Yay. In fact, the only interpretation I haven't read is that Luna is clearly a Lesbian who will end up with Hermione, of course. But I'm sure it's only a matter of time. ;-) She said neither of this, all she said is that Neville/Luna won't happen, everything else is just wishful thinking from the different shippers. Hickengruendler From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Dec 13 22:43:42 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 22:43:42 -0000 Subject: Angry Harry in HBP? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119837 Javalorum: Maybe I'm just asking too much here. But I thought, in order for a book to be outstanding (at least worthy of Harry Potter book's quanlity), and a character to be outstanding (at least worthy of the younger Harry), the book has to show Harry's qualities in a understandable yet remarkable manner. It's almost like you know this awesome kid, and you think, "wow, I can't wait to see what great things he's going to do when he gets older, and what a great person he's going to become". And he turned out to be just another self- obsorbed teenager. I know he has way more obstacles than normal people, but hey, for one, majority of readers are normal, and young, it's tricky to make them understand something that farfetched (though I'm sure a fraction of readers will); and secondly, I just wished someone like the older version of the young Harry would be able to struggle and overcome the obstacles instead of just being self- obsorbed all the time. It's kind of like LOTR:two towers, when facing the impossiblity of survival, the heros still say (and believe, more imporantly) "there is hope". Obviously Harry's a lot younger and less wise, but I guess it was just my "but he was such a great kid before, he's gonna become a real hero" that got me anticipated, and later disappointed. Alla: Oh, it reminds me about Harry-centered discussion I had with Del earlier.(Waves at Del) That is kind of strange. To her I was defending more "herolike" Harry and now I find myself to be I suppose in the middle. No, I don't want Harry to be "Hero Harry" all the time. I would find it extremely dissapointing and I am glad that JKR did not go that way. I want to see more or less realistic emotions,while at the same time see Harry overcoming the trials and tribulations of his life in heroic way. He is growing up. He was hurt in the worst possible way not once but many times and is he supposed to be calm and cheerful all times? I disagree. I am extremely grateful to JKR that she showed us Harry growing up in more or less realistic way, while going through rebellious, angry, "self-obsorbed" teenager phase of life. I have no doubt that he will overgrew it eventually, but if this phase did not happen, I personally would have been upset with the books. Harry is a Hero of the books, but I am glad that Rowling also gave the character a chance to be a teenager. Javalorum: I guess what I'm trying to say is, I don't think half of the reasons that got Harry angry are logical or understandable at the first place. Alla: Could you please clarify? Which reasons that got Harry upset did you consider to be not logical or understandable? Because I found all of them to be logical and understandable. Java: Anyway, thanks everybody for giving me a great chance to talk about Harry Potter. I do enjoy the books and am thankful for their existence. :) Alla: Me too. :o) From manawydan at ntlworld.com Mon Dec 13 22:47:03 2004 From: manawydan at ntlworld.com (manawydan) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 22:47:03 -0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] website SPOILERS . Who goes to Hogwarts References: <1102934398.15132.22483.m4@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <001301c4e165$ac71c460$704b6d51@f3b7j4> No: HPFGUIDX 119838 Juli wrote: >What exactly do you mean by this? We've already seen all social >classes at Hogwarts, from the so-called Royalty (Blacks, Malfoys), to >orphans (Tom Riddle, Harry), to muggle-born (Hermione)... Well, actually that fits quite well with Dave's perceptive post. We have actually seen - WW aristocracy (such as the Malfoys) - "Ministry kids" (such as the Weasleys) - and students whose background is in the Muggle world (such as Harry and Hermione) JKR has said that around a quarter of the Hogwarts students are Muggleborn - given that she's also said that pressure is put on Muggle parents to respond to the Hogwarts letter (they get a _visit_ from someone if they're not inclined to cooperate), then it seems likely that there are very few refusals from this source (those with one wizarding parent might have less need of a magical education than those with two Muggle parents, who'd have a real job making their way in a totally alien world). Context suggests that the WW couldn't have kept its cultural distinctiveness if the proportion of Muggle borns was a high as 25%, therefore (depending on your preference) there's a greater or lesser lump of wizarding families who turn down the offer. Why would they do that? Partially perhaps because Hogwarts is seen as being an elite academy for the social and political elite - the three quarters who have two wizarding parents are destined to be the movers and shakers of the WW in their future life, probably the lion's share of them joining the MoM when they leave. What we haven't seen (or at least had pointed out to us) at Hogwarts are any wizarding students who are explicitly "wizarding commoners" - children of the WW's eel farmers, innkeepers, bus drivers, and those who are "off-screen" producing all the things that the WW needs. But JKR alone knows all Cheers Ffred O Benryn wleth hyd Luch Reon Cymru yn unfryd gerhyd Wrion Gwret dy Cymry yghymeiri From cmjohnstone at hotmail.com Mon Dec 13 23:00:02 2004 From: cmjohnstone at hotmail.com (littleleahstill) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 23:00:02 -0000 Subject: JKR's cryptic answer. Who sent the Lestranges to the Longbottoms? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119839 SSSusan wrote: Just a question of clarification. Barty, Jr., in his trial scene, was nothing more than a kid screaming, crying and begging his father to spare him, pleading and denying his guilt. He didn't go off calmly or willingly, declaring loyalty to Voldy, the way Bella, for instance, went. Are you arguing that this was totally an act on BJ's part, his attempt to try to gain sympathy for himself and/or generate an outcry against his father? Siriusly Snapey Susan Leah: The idea that Barty Jnr was generating an outcry against his father was dcgmck's, but it seems logical to me. In fact it was the description of Barty Jnr at his trial compared to the way he is referred to as 'my most faithful servant' by LV, that hasled some of us to finger Barty Jnr for the attack on the Longbottoms. In the pensieve we see Barty Jnr as you have described above, a grovelling wreck. >From Barty Jnr himself we learn that he was 'controlled' and finally imperiused by his father from the moment he left Azkaban. Yet Bertha, who, as ever, knows more than she should, describes Barty Jnr to LV as a 'faithful deatheater'. And Barty Jnr himself says 'When I had recovered my strength I thought only of finding my master....of returning to his service'. Why, if all he has done is hang around with a crowd of deatheaters, and then deny his involvement? Would the boy at the trial really want to risk Azkaban again? Why does LV decide Barty Jnr should be "deimperiused" immediately, why does he trust him to carry through the Moody impersonation? What in Barty Jnr's past, as we know it, has suggested he has the wherewithal to do this? Therefore, my thought is that it was Barty who arranged the little outing to the Longbottoms, and the trial was a great piece of acting. And Barty Jnr's not adverse to a nice bit of cruciatus, is he? From gryffindor.phan at gmail.com Mon Dec 13 23:01:38 2004 From: gryffindor.phan at gmail.com (Arya) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 23:01:38 -0000 Subject: A comment on SHIPs In-Reply-To: <9e.1baeb6a4.2eef7051@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119840 Arya writes: You're right of course. I should have included Death as a potential LT ship for Neville and/or Luna. Either way, I still hold to thinking the debunking means Neville and/or Luna have a certain fate (other partner, death, Dementor Kiss, falling into Mount Doom...)decreed for them by JKR that both enabled her to debunk and motivated her. Neil then wrote: You could be correct, but I think it is more a case of JKR just not liking a subject thread and wanting it ended. She doesn't like Voldemort being called Voldie. She can't see how people can possible like someone as nasty as Draco Malfoy. She has made it rather clear he is not going to become good. And it turned her stomach to think that anyone could ever consider a relationship between Draco and Hermione. I think Nevelle/Luna is just another one of those places she just, doesn't want people to go. ---------------- Yes, but I think you're missing the point. JKR is perhaps wishing fans to not detract from his ability to be seen now and in the future canon as a menacing antagonist so she said what she said (and also partly in chastising jest). She knows what Voldemort will do and knows "Volde" isn't a suitable moniker. For Draco, JKR also knows what will happen to Draco and what he will do and so, she cautions Draco fen from hoping and wishing on something that just isn't going to happen. Same for Draco/Hermione--Draco, obviously, isn't going to be good and isn't for Hermione (or something, I'm not trying to argue about that now) so JKR cautions those hanging their hopes on that ship that it's not going to happen and even does some explanation, IIRC. See, she debunks those theories that are not just things that will not come true in solid canon form but which will be likely actively and outright contradicted by future canon. Draco and Hermione will not get together simply because JKR isn't going to write it but because one or both will do have their character's evolve in a way to make this ship contrary to canon (be that death, definitive split of ideals and actions, other attachments, etc). There are things to be inferred from JKR debunking theories. Arya From annemehr at yahoo.com Mon Dec 13 23:06:27 2004 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 23:06:27 -0000 Subject: Longbottoms/Lestranges/Bagman/Lockhart (was: Re: JKR's cryptic answer) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119841 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "greatelderone" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "annemehr" > wrote: > > > There's definitely a piece of the puzzle that Jo hasn't given us > yet. > > As you wonder later, "what information could Bagman have that > would > > interest a Voldy spy already in the Ministry?" > > GEO: Why does Rookwood need a reason? He was gathering human > intelligence for Voldemort, no doubtly he recruited Bagman because > he didn't have someone high up in the quidditch teams to spy and > gather information for his master. Annemehr again: Well, and he recruited Bagman because he knew him personally (he was friends with Bagman's father). But what "human intelligence" are you thinking of? Was Rookwood just casting a wide net, having Ludo tell him anything and everything he notices, in hopes something useful turns up? His team (all-England) had played against Turkey the Saturday before the hearing we see; do you suppose a young Quidditch star would have entree into some international circles that LV would be interested in? I don't know, it's hard to imagine where Ludo Bagman's circle of knowledge would overlap with LV's circle of interest. I liked Pippin's thought a few posts back that Jo was recalling the old "I Spy" series, though -- my memories of the show are too hazy for me ever to have thought of that on my own. Perhaps Jo never meant to get into the details of the past once she'd established the chance that Ludo might be "a bad wizard." Annemehr From annemehr at yahoo.com Mon Dec 13 23:13:24 2004 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 23:13:24 -0000 Subject: JKR's cryptic answer. Who sent the Lestranges to the Longbottoms? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119842 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "littleleahstill" wrote: > Yet Bertha, who, as ever, knows more than she should, describes Barty > Jnr to LV as a 'faithful deatheater'. Annemehr: I'm not sure this is true. I think what LV learned from Bertha was: ~Crouch Jr. and the Lestranges tried to find LV after he'd disappeared and were sent to Azkaban for it (this is common knowledge). ~Crouch Jr. was being held prisoner by his father and thus available to LV as the Azkaban prisoners (also faithful, presumably) were not. LV already knew Crouch Jr. was a DE, of course, and the first item of information is what told him that Jr. was faithful. Thus, Bertha need not know anything more than "she should." Annemehr From darkmatter30 at yahoo.com Mon Dec 13 23:17:30 2004 From: darkmatter30 at yahoo.com (Richard) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 23:17:30 -0000 Subject: SHIP Calculus--JKR site spoiler In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119843 antoshachekhonte wrote: > > I'll indulge my inner adolescent here. I'm not a shipper, > > per se, but I've always felt that the romantic subplot(s) > > of the series were important and only likely to become > > more so as the characters mature. > > So what have we got left? > > > > If Hermione ends up with Ron, the others will sort > > theemselves out Ginny/Neville and Luna/Harry. > > > > If Hermione ends up with Harry, then we get Luna/Ron > > and Ginny/Neville. > > > > If Hermione ends up with Neville, then we have Luna/Ron > > and inny/Harry. > > > > That's it. No other options. > > > > Of course, they might play musical chairs over the > > course of books 6 and 7. And they may (as I said) pair > > up with others. And one or more may die. > > > > Still. Gives one pause, doesn't it? > annemehr wrote: > For symmetry's sake, I like Hermione/Neville, Luna/Ron > and Harry/Ginny. It pairs a primary member with a secon- > dary member and avoids shipping within the trio, which > leaves HRH free to remain, always, *friends.* I like > their friendship just as it is and see no need to mess > with it. Unless JKR makes me, of course. > > My sentimental choice is the one with Luna/Harry. It's > a ship I've always thought would go well. But also, > Harry is so relaxed and comfortable with Hermione now, > and I'd hate to see him get all nervous around her as a > suitor, just when he's going to need her help during > the war. And, yes he probably would get nervous; that'd > be him all over. Ron/Hermione, on the other hand, would > probably just leave Harry bemused, especially if they > quit carping at each other. > > Shipping within the Sextet -- quite a fleet you've got > going, and yes, there's a storm brewing... > > Annemehr darkmatter here ... OK, so let's assume for the moment that your options are the only viable ones. (Large assumption, but then simplifying assumptions are how one arrives at certain classes of proofs ...) Further, there is much to be said for Annemehr's point of view. But, there is a kink to be unwound: I believe at least one of the trio will die, as will one of the secondary trio. For assorted reasons, I think Ron will die. Why? Well, there are a number of reasons, but it is hard to see how JKR, who ordinarily does deal rather directly with some hard subjects, and with deft indirection in certain others, would NOT have a serious, knock-down- drag-out war without some thoroughly central character dying. Not all heroes survive wars. We have the scene with Molly and the Bogart, and Ron's continuing trend of off-hand comments turning into real events, and a host of other things. Of course, it would not be uncharacteristic for JKR to throw us a curve on this kind of point, too. But, bear with me ... and feel free to posit alternatives without getting too upset with me. So, let's say Ron is dead, at the end, and there is some form of symmetry between the primary and secondary trios. So, we should conclude that one female dies in the secondary trio. I can't see two front-and-center Weasleys dying, so assuming Ron dies we have Ginny surviving ... and one dead Luna. If the symmetry is a primary weds a secondary, there is only one possible set of pairings: Hermione/Neville and Ginny/Harry. Otherwise, it must be Ginny/Neville and Hermione/Harry. Both of these pairings for Harry are among the more popular alternatives, either puts Harry with a woman (after all, when we are talking about eventual marriages, we aren't talking about these children as children any longer) who will not be a "and spouse." Neville is, however, a different matter. either pairing would, as things stand, be "unequal." However, I think we have ample canon to say that Neville will not remain a bumbler. Rather, he will be a force in his own right, and an outstanding herbologist. So, again, we might well expect this to be a marriage of equals. I've always had a problem with the Ron/Hermione SHIP, even though it is clear that there is real chemistry there. The problem is one of experience. I've known a great many people and couples, over the years, and the kind of chemistry I see between Hermione and Ron is the kind that I have seen produce wild romances and rotten marriages. This is NOT due to character flaws of the parties involved, per se, but the fact that the more things a couple has in common the more likely the relationship will be durable. Opposites may well attract to a point, but then they can also repell, and generally end up doing so if sufficiently extreme. In the H/R case, I see each as respecting significant parts of each other, but also having little or no respect ... even a certain contempt ... for other facets. For example, Ron sure seems to think Hermione is well off her rocker when it comes to Elf rights, and Hermione definitely sees Ron as, at least at times, incredibly insensitive. The fly in the ointment of all this is, however, that these are children, and much can happen to change them for better or worse twixt now (OotP) and the fictional adulthoods were romances become marriages. On the H/H versus G/H fronts, I don't see substantial problems with either ... except for Harry himself. Anyone who grew up as Harry did will have emotional baggage that will be hard to deal with. But, both Hermione and Ginny arguably will grow to have the tools and the experience with Harry to deal with that baggage. So, I think either pairing is realistically workable. I couldn't choose between them if I had to. darkmatter ... who thinks JKR is sufficiently attached to realism as part of the lessons she imparts that she will not intentionally leave us with a SHIP that is in real-world psychological terms "difficult at best." From dolis5657 at yahoo.com Mon Dec 13 23:42:41 2004 From: dolis5657 at yahoo.com (dcgmck) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 23:42:41 -0000 Subject: JKR's cryptic answer: "Who sent the Lestranges to the Longbottoms?" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119844 SSSusan: > Just a question of clarification. > > Barty, Jr., in his trial scene, was nothing more than a kid > screaming, crying and begging his father to spare him, pleading and > denying his guilt. He didn't go off calmly or willingly, declaring > loyalty to Voldy, the way Bella, for instance, went. Are you arguing > that this was totally an act on BJ's part, his attempt to try to gain > sympathy for himself and/or generate an outcry against his father? > > Siriusly Snapey Susan dcgmck: Yes. OK, a little more... As the faux Mad-Eye Moody, we are given an opportunity to see Barty, Jr. sustain a role for an entire school year, this after years of having been under an imperious curse himself. One simply doesn't get that kind of skill overnight. Of course, one might argue that he honed his acting craft conning his father while breaking the imperius curse, but to have even had the stuff to begin with, he had to have had some bent for acting. So, yes, I can easily see Barty, Jr. putting on an act in order to discredit his father. Whether or not he knew he would later be able to throw off an imperius curse, (possibly from training similar to that he gives Harry's DADA class?), or because knowing his parents, he was pretty sure his act would cause his mother to intercede for him later if his father proved to be the heartless bastard he'd always suspected, he hated his neglectful father enough to run the risk. If anything, that Pensieve scene is a strong argument for Barty's later acting success in GoF. From dfrankiswork at netscape.net Tue Dec 14 00:18:28 2004 From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (davewitley) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 00:18:28 -0000 Subject: Longbottoms/Lestranges/Bagman/Lockhart (was: Re: JKR's cryptic answer) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119845 Annemehr" asked: > As you wonder later, "what information could Bagman have that would > interest a Voldy spy already in the Ministry?" Ah, didn't his brother Otto have a lawnmower with unnatural powers or something? Lawnmowers cut grass. An unnatural lawnmower might well put grass clippings back on the plant - something of obvious interest to someone pursuing immortality. David Like flowery fields the nations stand Pleased with the morning light; The flowers beneath the mower's hand Lie withering ere 'tis night. From McGregorMax at ec.rr.com Tue Dec 14 00:49:51 2004 From: McGregorMax at ec.rr.com (mcmaxslb) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 00:49:51 -0000 Subject: website SPOILERS . Who goes to Hogwarts In-Reply-To: <001301c4e165$ac71c460$704b6d51@f3b7j4> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119846 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "manawydan" wrote: > Juli wrote:We have actually seen > - WW aristocracy (such as the Malfoys) > - "Ministry kids" (such as the Weasleys) > - and students whose background is in the Muggle world (such as Harry and Hermione Ffred wrote: > What we haven't seen (or at least had pointed out to us) at Hogwarts are any > wizarding students who are explicitly "wizarding commoners" - children of the WW's eel farmers, innkeepers, bus drivers, and those who are "off-screen" producing all the things that the WW needs. The problem is that JKR has decleared Hogwarts the only magic school in Britain. That causes several questions such as if the student body is 1000, that means the WW of Britain is incredibly small and these class questions. However JKR has said one thing(Hermione is the youngest of the Trio) and then reversed that(Hermione is the oldest of the Trio BTY she can do that),so she could come out with that there are other schools in Britain but Hogwarts is "the" school. From willsonkmom at msn.com Tue Dec 14 01:06:58 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 01:06:58 -0000 Subject: JKR's cryptic answer. Who sent the Lestranges to the Longbottoms? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119847 > Annemehr: snip LV already knew Crouch Jr. was a DE, of course, and the first item of information is what told him that Jr. was faithful. Thus, Bertha need not know anything more than "she should." Potioncat: Also, as everyone thought Barty Jr. was dead, he could easily take over as Moody. No one would miss him or think of him and LV didn't have to get anyone out of prison or confide in anyone else. And Barty, more than any other DE, needed LV. From McGregorMax at ec.rr.com Tue Dec 14 01:48:25 2004 From: McGregorMax at ec.rr.com (mcmaxslb) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 01:48:25 -0000 Subject: Hermione's age In-Reply-To: <20041213221249.78923.qmail@web25308.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119848 > "slgazit" wrote: > I think you have to be 17 to start apparation lessons, so she should > not be able to. First I find it hard to believe that Hogwarts doesn't teach apparation. Maybe in HBP we will see a room in the castle that allows this or they take the kids who are ready to learn to Hogmeade for the day. I think the most interesting thing is now that the characters ages mean something in that when a witch or wizard turns seventeen they no longer come under the under age magic restrictions that Hermione will be the first to be able to apparate and do magic outside of school. (One more thing for Ron to be a jealous jerk about.) But as for Harry being left behind because of age, remember Dumbledore and Voldemort fighting in the MoM and how they were apparating all over the place. What could be more useful in a fight, not a duel but a fight, than the ability to apparate behind an enemy and attack him or disapparate away from their attack. I think that this is too important, indeed even lifesaving for Harry not to be able to do regardless of ministry regulations. So Harry maybe the first to learn not the last. From hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu Tue Dec 14 02:19:21 2004 From: hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu (Bex) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 02:19:21 -0000 Subject: Who goes to Hogwarts In-Reply-To: <001301c4e165$ac71c460$704b6d51@f3b7j4> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119849 Ffred wrote: > JKR has said that around a quarter of the Hogwarts students are > Muggleborn - given that she's also said that pressure is put on > Muggle parents to respond to the Hogwarts letter (they get a > _visit_ from someone if they're not inclined to cooperate), then > it seems likely that there are very few refusals from this source > (those with one wizarding parent might have less need of a magical > education than those with two Muggle parents, who'd have a real > job making their way in a totally alien world). Yb, who's been absent for a while: I'd like to point out one little thing. That *visit* that Muggle- borns get when they get their letter - it isn't (usually) a "convincing" visit like the one the Dursleys got; it's an "explanatory visit." Though the parents have noticed their child is a bit "different," the idea of /magical/ has probably never occured to them. So when they get this letter from out of the blue, they'd probably think it was some sort of gag. An ambassador would probably have to go along and deliver the letter personally so that questions could be answered. The person would probably be a professor, and a respected one at that. Hagrid was sent to "chat" with the Dursleys because he is a bit more, ahh, physically persuasive than a normal sized person, and he could "chat" without needing to resort to magic (I doubt Vernon's rifle would have done much damage to Hagrid had it actually been fired). Harry didn't get this treatment because Petunia knew all about the wizarding world, and as such could tell Harry about Hogwarts, etc. So maybe Professor Sprout, or McGonnagall, or even Dumbledore himself would go to these Muggleborns to explain what Hogwarts is and other things. Perhaps they provide directions to Diagon Alley. Note that no directions were provided to any of these places were provided in Harry's letter. We can make a few guesses about this. This means that: a. The letter-writer (presumably McGonnagall, though just because she signed it doesn't she wrote it; it read a lot like a form letter) assumed that Harry knew about these things, and therefore assumed Petunia knew how to get to these places, and had told Harry. b. The letter-writer knew that Hagrid was taking the letter to Harry, and as such, would tell him all these things. This means that the contents of the letter were altered /specifically/ for Harry, and that most letters to Muggleborns include directions, etc. c. Directions to Diagon Alley and the platform, and other bits of information are /never/ distributed in letters. The ambassador is expected to tell the Muggleborns about these things. Where Harry would fit in this one is not known, since Petunia should probably have only limited knowledge of this stuff. I think (c) is the most likely scenario, just because that's how I feel today. Ffred: > What we haven't seen (or at least had pointed out to us) at > Hogwarts are any wizarding students who are explicitly "wizarding > commoners" - children of the WW's eel farmers, innkeepers, bus > drivers, and those who are "off-screen" producing all the things > that the WW needs. Yb again: Ahhh yes, those inconspicuous cogs that keep the world turning 'round. We've seen people like that: Old Tom from the Leaky Cauldron, Fortescue who runs the Ice Cream Shop, and plenty of others who run shops in Diagon Alley. And Knockturn Alley, though I don't expect some of the characters /there/ reproduce much... :) And Stan Shunpike, who many folks ask about. Apparently he went to Hogwarts. It's the only school in Britian, and Stan doesn't seem like the kind of student to go abroad. I suppose the closest thing we've seen to WW "commoners" is Luna Lovegood, her father being a magazine publisher/owner. I suppose several of these commoners are in Slytherin. (Wonder what Pansy Parkinson and Crabbe and Goyle's father's do for a living? Thwy can't all juggle assets like Mr. Malfoy.) The only reason I say this is that the WW is inclined to do business with well-respected, properly established shops. A quick way to earn respect would probably be to be a pure-blood; you'd have a solid chunk of the population on your side, establishing a good comsumer base, and easily starting to monopolize the market. Get some of your pure-bred buddies spreading your name around, and you'd be in a pretty good position. Yb, ending a kinda twirly swirly post now. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 14 02:28:51 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 02:28:51 -0000 Subject: Angry Harry in HBP and OotP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119850 > Laurasia: Since when was July so important? The reason why we never *needed* to see July before because it was always some no-man's land where not much changed. The July between GoF and OotP was when Harry underwent his most dramatic change in the entire story. snip. Harry didn't have to become angry. He wasn't, IMO, angry at the end of GoF- in shock, definitely, but this shock was yet to manifest itself. If he had support, it could have manifested itself in a much more constructive and healing form. If he had received proper support and counselling he would have better accepted the situation and, IMO, not become so volatile (maybe found complete resolution). Because of this, the turning point for his character *isn't* in the graveyard, it's the time that begins as soon as he walks away from platform 9 3/4. > The thing that makes Harry angry *isn't* seeing his friend murdered, it's being left alone to dwell on it for several weeks. What we see at the start of OotP is when Harry's angry culminates. What we don't see are the events that left him so desperate. Those events (the weeks spent alone) was what ended up driving Harry the entire book (he still blames Dumbledore for leaving him all alone at the end of the book). Alla: OK, I see your point and I probably agree with your logic ... to the point. Yes, it may have helped US the readers to see the drastic change in Harry's mood in order to easier accept the overall change in the character, BUT I don't think I agree that graveyeard scene itself could be THAT easily dismissed as reason for Harry to become angry. It IS a tremendous shock to see your classmate murdered and in the beginning of OOP Harry is still having nightmares about graveyard. To me it is possible that Graveyeard itself forced those unpleasant changes in Harry's attitude. Not to rehash the subject of Dursleys, but I personally believe that Dursleys should have made Harry VERY angry long time ago. Come to think about it, I think I saw enough to believe in Harry's belief that his friends abandoned him. We SEE him anxiously watching news on TV in desperate hope to see anything about Voldemort return. We see him awaiting letters from his friends and hoping to read anything of importance of those letters. I think in this case "less is more" may apply (just my opinion, of course). Moreover, I agree with Geoff (see his post 118974) that sometimes those changes in teenagers appear suddenly for no reason at all, or it seems so. :o) Alla From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 14 02:38:01 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 02:38:01 -0000 Subject: website SPOILERS . Who goes to Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119851 Kjirstem: IMO there was another variable left open by the phrasing of JKR's answer, which was kids who show magic ability *after* the age of 11. She says, "Everyone who shows magical ability before their eleventh birthday will automatically gain a place at Hogwarts;..." I vaguely recall JKR saying something about magical ability usually showing up in young kids, but surely there are some kids whose ability isn't shown until after their eleventh birthday. What happens to them? Neville only showed his ability under pretty extreme conditions IMO. I wonder what would have happened if his family hadn't been so bent on testing him to destruction. Alla: Oh, but what does it mean "to be magical"? I stated earlier that I imagine magic as essential part of the child's soul. I don't think that Neville's family was worried for a right reason. Remember "magic quill" which records the birth of magical kid, then Minerva looks in the books and sends admission letters. Theoretically the quill recognises the child as magical, when he/she was just born. Clearly child can not do any magic yet, wandless or otherwise. I think Neville had magic in himself from birth and his family was just acting crasy. :o) From bob.oliver at cox.net Tue Dec 14 02:59:19 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 02:59:19 -0000 Subject: Angry Harry in HBP? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119852 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > Alla: > > Could you please clarify? Which reasons that got Harry upset did you > consider to be not logical or understandable? Because I found all of > them to be logical and understandable. > > I'm not Javalorum, obviously, but I'll take a stab at it. I think what Java is trying to say is that it isn't that Harry being angry at events is unbelievable, it's that the events *themselves* are unbelievable. That is it stretches credulity to think that Dumbledore would be *that* stupid, that McGonagall would be *that* ham-handed and unsympathetic, etc. The whole thing smells of plot device. In order to have Harry become progressively angrier to the point of breakdown, JKR had to have the characters around Harry behave in incredibly stupid ways that are not in keeping with how they've been portrayed in previous books. I think this relates to what a lot of people said when they first read OOTP, i.e. that it seemed more like fanfiction than canon. Many of the characters around Harry seem off kilter and slightly bizarre, apparently because JKR wanted Harry to reach breakdown point and had to do wierd things with the characters in order to achieve that. My take, anyway. Lupinlore From hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu Tue Dec 14 03:06:38 2004 From: hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu (Bex) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 03:06:38 -0000 Subject: Hermione's age In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119853 mcmaxslb (sign your posts!): > First I find it hard to believe that Hogwarts doesn't teach > apparation. Maybe in HBP we will see a room in the castle that > allows this or they take the kids who are ready to learn to > Hogsmeade for the day. > > I think the most interesting thing is now that the characters ages > mean something in that when a witch or wizard turns seventeen they > no longer come under the under age magic restrictions that > Hermione will be the first to be able to apparate and do magic > outside of school. Yb: *Anti-Ron statement edited out :)* I know, I know, it's just like him, but wait, I have some thoughts on this. mcmaxslb: > But as for Harry being left behind because of age, remember > Dumbledore and Voldemort fighting in the MoM and how they were > apparating all over the place. What could be more useful in a > fight, not a duel but a fight, than the ability to apparate behind > an enemy and attack him or disapparate away from their attack. I > think that this is too important, indeed even lifesaving for Harry > not to be able to do regardless of ministry regulations. So Harry > maybe the first to learn not the last. Yb: Maybe not the first, but he won't be waiting till July, and you can knock me over with a feather if I'm wrong too. See, Hermione is going to be learning to Apparate a whole SIX (6) (six) months before EITHER of the boys will. Boy, won't Ron be green with envy for this! What do we know? -Hermione is a bookworm. -She's not above helping the boys with (dangerous) magical stuff they probably shouldn't be doing (like the polyjuice potion). -The boys are like normal boys: a friend gets a car, they /all/ want to drive it. So Hermione has probably been studying like mad over the summer to prepare for this. She's read every book she can find, maybe even a manual, or a summer class of some sort. (I don't know how it works in the UK, but in the US, you can take Driver's Ed when you're 15, then take the test for your license at 16 and 1 month.) So she's got all the paper part down. A few weeks into the school year, maybe McGonnagall takes her aside for some training; perhaps there's a class at Hogwarts that allows of-age wizards to practice; then the first Hogsmeade visit (Halloween), she takes the test at the Apparation Branch that is surely there. It's the largest all-wizard settlement in the UK, of course they'd have one. And if they don't, perhaps she could Floo to the MoM for a Saturday. Anyway, she passes with flying colors, as Hermione always does, and suddenly Harry sees how useful this little talent is. And Ron is jealous, but he wants to learn how, preferably not from a book, but from Hermione (GO R/H SHIPPERS!!!!). "Hermione, teach us..." "C'mon, just tell us about the test..." "Is there a spell? I mean, how do you do it?" "I know you can't apparate on the Hogwarts grounds, but can you show us at Hogsmeade next weekend?" "Come on, Hermione..." So Hermione starts coaching them, like an instructor would (and Ron would probably need all the help he can get). Thus Harry gets lessons /months/ before he should be getting them, and he is pretty good at apparating before the school year is out, to the point that when Ron takes his test, Harry is coaching the older students. He is the probably the youngest in his class, after all. Perhaps DD can make him an "Apparating Permit" that allows him to apparate legally though he's underage? (We have Driving permits in the US, given to someone at the successful completion of Driver's Ed; you have strict limitations on them, like no driving passengers unless a 21+ person is in the front passenger seat, etc.) I will be honest, this was *THE* book in the series I wanted to see, since reading GoF, and finding out about the Apparation test. Max is right; it's the first one in the series where the character's ages will make a serious difference in what happens to them. Not only would this one clear up the "Hermione's age" question, but it could have serious implications on Harry. If he has to wait until July to learn how to apparate, (In which case we'll have to wait for book SEVEN, ARRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGH!!!!!!!!!!!) we will definitely see a more alienated Harry, since all of his friends will be able to Apparate before he will. He could be forced to hang out with Ginny more, if Ron and Hermione are busy studying, or practicing, or "studying." :) LOL Here are some things I want to know: Will somebody get in trouble for apparating illegally? Will someone splinch themselves? (Neville is a very likely candidate for this.) How does the training and testing system for Apparation work? Are there classes? (I look in my crystal ball, and I see Harry demanding information from Hermione on this subject, so we get to see some of it in this book instead of the next one.) And one more little thing... -GoF: Ron is a very angry person. -OotP: Harry is a very angry person. -HBP: Will Hermione have an emotional upset in this book? Now some may say that that happened in PoA, but I don't quite agree. I think that Hermione wasn't in the middle of some teenage angst then; she didn't have the /time/ for it. So maybe her turn's up for a screaming breakdown. If it is, it will be for one of two reasons: a. She gets fed up with Ron being seemingly oblivious to her, nad finally lets him have it, and they finally get together as a couple, putting Harry into further alienation. b. Or she finally fails at something. Not just messing up a question or two, but actually FAILING. If this is the case, she would be in a bad mood for ages, and we'd see a completely different side of her, like we've seen with Ron and Harry in the two previous books. It could be interesting. I'd kinda like to see the first one, just because all of us shippers could finally get some sleep, but the second shows some major promise, and some possible ships developing from it as well. (Harry goes to comfort her, she bites his head off, he tells Ron (after Madame Pomfrey reattaches his head), Ron gets angry, confronts Hermione, and their verbal sparring is just what she needs to take her mind off things, thus all of my wishes come true, and all those bets I made pay off BIG TIME!!!) :) Anyway.... So what could Hermione possibly fail? She probably set a record for the number of owls she got (a whole freaking flock!), so it can't be that. What if she fails Apparition? It's probably like flying; you can read all you want to on the subject, but actually trying it is the only way to learn it. So she could finally flop at something, losing her perfect record, and perhaps Ron is a natural for it, so he passes it with flying colors, and /she/ becomes green with envy. Interesting.. Any thoughts? ~Yb, who had a great time writing this. From hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu Tue Dec 14 03:16:30 2004 From: hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu (Bex) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 03:16:30 -0000 Subject: website SPOILERS . Who goes to Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119854 Kjirstem wrote: > I vaguely recall JKR saying something about magical ability usually > showing up in young kids, but surely there are some kids whose > ability isn't shown until after their eleventh birthday. What > happens to them? Neville only showed his ability under pretty > extreme conditions IMO. I wonder what would have happened if his > family hadn't been so bent on testing him to destruction. Alla: > Oh, but what does it mean "to be magical"? I stated earlier that I > imagine magic as essential part of the child's soul. I don't think > that Neville's family was worried for a right reason. > Remember "magic quill" which records the birth of magical kid, > then Minerva looks in the books and sends admission letters. > Theoretically the quill recognises the child as magical, when > he/she was just born. Clearly child can not do any magic yet, > wandless or otherwise. > > I think Neville had magic in himself from birth and his family was > just acting crasy. :o) Yb now: But, Neville's family probably didn't know that the quill had written him down. Surely children two or three years old usually show a little magical aptitude, before they learn to keep their emotions in check. Perhaps Neville wasn't showing that. Also, remember that Neville's Grandma keeps comparing him to him father (her son). Maybe Frank was doing all sorts of wandless magic when he was a toddler, like slinging toys around or breaking dishes. If Neville wasn't showing these very obvious signs, she'd be concerned that he was a Squib. (Maybe she didn't notice that her flowers perked up when he played in the flower garden?) Frank was this great wizard (he was in the order, and he couldn't have been past his mid- twenties), and Alice was probably pretty skilled as well. When Grandma didn't see Neville showing the signs, she started getting worried. Of course, there's always Protective!Grandma, who saw what happened to her son and daughter-in-law and desperately /didn't/ want that to happen to Neville, so she was hoping he *wasn't* magical, possibly to the point of doing something /about/ it. ~Yb From jillily3g at yahoo.com Tue Dec 14 03:20:51 2004 From: jillily3g at yahoo.com (Beth) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 03:20:51 -0000 Subject: What Dumbledore knew [was: Re: Possession: Taking it Further] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119855 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "annemehr" wrote: [snip lots of fun theorizing] > > And while you're at it, anyone with a theory about how Dumbledore knew > what saved Harry from possession in the MoM, please feel free to > share. If he knew Harry was thinking of Sirius and his heart filled > with emotion, how did DD find out, was Harry speaking out loud? If > it's merely that DD knows what "the power behind the locked door" is, > knows that Harry possesses it in vast quantities, and knows LV can't > stand to be around it, then why was he afraid of Harry being possessed > in the first place? > > Annemehr Beth: Just a thought: Perhaps a someone "highly skilled at Legilimency", as LV is reported by Snape to be in Ch. 24, OoP, doesn't make as much as an impact as Snape does when they're probing another's thoughts. Sort of like an expert cat burglar vs. the guy who got stuck in the chimney. Snape says that LV almost always knows when someone is lying to him. What if this is because he's attuned to lies since they are so much a part of what he is and Dumbledore can pick up on thoughts of love (and maybe other non-Dark Side powers) without being "noticed" because he's much more aligned that way? (I'm sure someone else could state this more clearly!) Perhaps this was an additional "fatal flaw" in Dumbledore's plan; that he wasn't sure Harry did possess vast quantities of love, considering that Harry didn't experience any for 10 years of his life. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 14 03:41:21 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 03:41:21 -0000 Subject: Angry Harry in HBP? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119856 Lupinlore: I'm not Javalorum, obviously, but I'll take a stab at it. I think what Java is trying to say is that it isn't that Harry being angry at events is unbelievable, it's that the events *themselves* are unbelievable. That is it stretches credulity to think that Dumbledore would be *that* stupid, that McGonagall would be *that* ham-handed and unsympathetic, etc. The whole thing smells of plot device. In order to have Harry become progressively angrier to the point of breakdown, JKR had to have the characters around Harry behave in incredibly stupid ways that are not in keeping with how they've been portrayed in previous books. Alla: Oh, OK, thanks. I understand this POV, but I disagree with it. I think Dumbledore's flaws (keeping important information from Harry in this instance) were developed pretty nicely over the series and did not just show up out of nowhere at the end of OOP. For example, remember the end of PS/SS and what does Dumbledore answer to Harry's inquiry "truth is terrible thing" blah, blah,blah. :o). We discussed Mcgonagall recently and yes, I think she should have done MUCH more for Harry than telling him "to get a grip", BUT I do think that she was acting in character. Have you EVER seen her acting nice and motherly to Harry during the course of the series? She is fair, IMO but not kind. So, NO, I disagree with the opinion that characters acted wierdly only to help plot moving forward in OOP. I do think that character development was not compromised for the most part. JMO. Alla From imamommy at sbcglobal.net Tue Dec 14 03:49:15 2004 From: imamommy at sbcglobal.net (imamommy at sbcglobal.net) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 03:49:15 -0000 Subject: website SPOILERS . Who goes to Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119857 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "hp_lexicon" wrote: > > > What I immediately noticed is that she only half-way answered the > question. So did Stan Shunpike go to Hogwarts? How common is it for > people NOT to go? All this tells us is that the invitation goes out. > What percentage of people say yes? If almost everyone says yes, then > the total number of school age Wizarding children in Britain is > frightfully small -- at most a thousand, as per Jo's comment. That's > the size of a small high school in the United States, and most > communities have a number of such high schools. > > If, on the other hand, most families turn down the position in favor > of having the kids go into a trade, then the Wizarding World is a > bit more reasonable size. > > I should have rephrased the question...and I spent a month writing > those questions, hoping to avoid this sort of thing! > > Steve > The Lexicon imamommy: So, why do we all question Stan Shunpike's Hogwarts attendence? Is it just because he speaks in a less genteel manner than the Hogwarts students we are used to dealing with and has what we would consider a service industry job? I recently moved back to my home town after living in various other places for seven years. A few years ago, I saw a kid I used to go to high school with working as a stocker at WalMart. A few weeks ago I was at WalMart, and I saw him again, apparently still in the same job. This boy went to the same school I did, actually the same community college as well, and yet this is his career path. So maybe Stan Shunpike did go to Hogwarts, and the Knight Bus is just all the further he got. After all, what kind of career lies in store for Crabbe and Goyle? And what if Stan did go to Hogwarts, but dropped out like Gred and Forge, only with not so stellar a contingency plan? In th US, plenty of students drop out of high school after they turn sixteen. Perhaps there is sex at Hogwarts, and Stan got some poor girl pregnant, and dropped out to support her. imamommy twitching with discomfort at the thought of Stan Shunpike and sex. From madettebeau at gmail.com Tue Dec 14 04:06:27 2004 From: madettebeau at gmail.com (madlysarcastic) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 04:06:27 -0000 Subject: McGonagall-ness (Re: Angry Harry in HBP?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119858 Alla wrote: > We discussed Mcgonagall recently and yes, I think she should have > done MUCH more for Harry than telling him "to get a grip", BUT I do > think that she was acting in character. > > > Have you EVER seen her acting nice and motherly to Harry during the > course of the series? She is fair, IMO but not kind. Maddy writes: Ah, but you're forgetting that she gave Harry his Nimbus 2000 in PS/SS and let him on the Quidditch team in his first year. And I'd say that's acting pretty kind. And yes, it probably was largely due to the fact that Harry showed great ability as a Seeker and she wanted to see Gryffindor win the Cup, but I think she wouldn't have done that for just anyone. No, I wouldn't ever describe McGonagall as "motherly", but that doesn't detract from her ability to be nice and kind. While she is very strict (yet, as you said, fair) I've found there are quite a few small instances where McGonagall shows a small amount of affection (whether it be a joke or advice) or gives a fleeting smile. She's not the type of person to be overly affectionate, or have favourite students, but I think she does have a tiny soft spot for Harry. I think she shows affection in very small, infrequent doses, but that doesn't mean it's not there. As for the "getting a grip" part in OotP, I think that's partly due to McGonagall's frustration with Umbrigde...she probably had to deal with Umbridge's unpleasentness quite a bit and didn't want to have to worry about Umbridge and Harry's interactions as well. I'd say she was a bit fed up with all things Umbridge. =) Maddy From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 14 04:15:59 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 04:15:59 -0000 Subject: McGonagall-ness (Re: Angry Harry in HBP?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119859 Alla wrote previously: We discussed Mcgonagall recently and yes, I think she should have done MUCH more for Harry than telling him "to get a grip", BUT I do think that she was acting in character. Have you EVER seen her acting nice and motherly to Harry during the course of the series? She is fair, IMO but not kind. Maddy writes: Ah, but you're forgetting that she gave Harry his Nimbus 2000 in PS/SS and let him on the Quidditch team in his first year. And I'd say that's acting pretty kind. And yes, it probably was largely due to the fact that Harry showed great ability as a Seeker and she wanted to see Gryffindor win the Cup, but I think she wouldn't have done that for just anyone. No, I wouldn't ever describe McGonagall as "motherly", but that doesn't detract from her ability to be nice and kind. While she is very strict (yet, as you said, fair) I've found there are quite a few small instances where McGonagall shows a small amount of affection (whether it be a joke or advice) or gives a fleeting smile. She's not the type of person to be overly affectionate, or have favourite students, but I think she does have a tiny soft spot for Harry. I think she shows affection in very small, infrequent doses, but that doesn't mean it's not there. > Alla: Hey, Maddy! I LOVE McGonagall's character. I was just disagreeing with Lupinlore that she suddenly went OOC in OOP. I do think that she would have done what she did for Harry in his first year for any student, who would have shown great talent as seeker. I guess I disagree with you on this one. Sure, McGonagall can be kind sometimes, I just don't see her doing it too often and demosntrating affection for Harry, but that is who she is. it would be strange if she suddenly went "Molly" on Harry. Minerva MAY feel affection for Harry, I just don't see it int he books. Could you give me some canon on this one? I will be happy to shift on this one. :o) I suppose her "I wil help you become an auror even if it will be the last thing I do" counts, but besides that I cannot remember anything. Alla From annemehr at yahoo.com Tue Dec 14 04:20:24 2004 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 04:20:24 -0000 Subject: What Dumbledore knew [was: Re: Possession: Taking it Further] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119860 Annemehr before: > > And while you're at it, anyone with a theory about how Dumbledore > knew > > what saved Harry from possession in the MoM, please feel free to > > share. > > Beth: Just a thought: Perhaps a someone "highly skilled at > Legilimency", as LV is reported by Snape to be in Ch. 24, OoP, doesn't > make as much as an impact as Snape does when they're probing another's > thoughts. Sort of like an expert cat burglar vs. the guy who got stuck > in the chimney. Snape says that LV almost always knows when someone is > lying to him. What if this is because he's attuned to lies since they > are so much a part of what he is and Dumbledore can pick up on > thoughts of love (and maybe other non-Dark Side powers) without being > "noticed" because he's much more aligned that way? (I'm sure someone > else could state this more clearly!) Annemehr: Beth! I could kiss you! Well, okay, that might be a little difficult... Sure, LV pops into the atrium and announces that Harry's telling the truth about the prophecy breaking, and everybody thinks, yeah, that's right, he can tell if Harry's lying. Never thought about what DD might be especially good at picking up. Then Harry did wake up from the possession with DD about an inch from his face, didn't he? Though his eyes were closed, he had to open them when he came to. They may have been open just before, when LV was controlling him, though. That must have been something from DD's point of view, looking into Harry's eyes and hearing LV speaking to him from behind there. It may have been a struggle seeing past Voldemort's thoughts to find Harry's beneath. Definitely creepy, too. I'd love it if Jo would someday decide to write some of this story from other characters' points of view. It's probably a forlorn hope, though. Annemehr From erikal at magma.ca Tue Dec 14 04:47:47 2004 From: erikal at magma.ca (Erika L.) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 23:47:47 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: SHIP Calculus--JKR site spoiler Message-ID: <00d401c4e198$100bbda0$4c8b1a40@hppav> No: HPFGUIDX 119861 annemehr wrote: > For symmetry's sake, I like Hermione/Neville, Luna/Ron > and Harry/Ginny. It pairs a primary member with a secon- > dary member and avoids shipping within the trio, which > leaves HRH free to remain, always, *friends.* I like > their friendship just as it is and see no need to mess > with it. Unless JKR makes me, of course. darkmatter: >But, there is a kink to be unwound: I believe at least one of the trio >will die, as will one of the secondary trio. >For assorted reasons, I think Ron will die. I'm inclined to agree. I find shipping theories that pair up all six members of the DoM sextet to be incredibly optimistic. Such an ending would seem too perfectly symmetrical to be believable outside of a Shakespearean comedy, and with a war going on I, too, believe that one or even two fatalities among the sextet are inevitable. I also agree that there's a great deal of possible foreshadowing of Ron's death, but then so too is there is with Harry... On the other hand there's a chance Rowling does intend to go with a more unlikely sort of ending and have the entire Trio survive. Casualties could be limited to the secondary Trio leaving openings for R/Hr and H/L, or asymmetrical shipping with someone left out in the cold without a sextet ship-- which seems just as likely as anything else. H/G R/Hr with Neville and/or Luna six feet under and the other lacking a significant other. Or H/Hr and R/L with Ginny or Neville KIA or single. darkmatter: >I've always had a problem with the Ron/Hermione SHIP, even >though it is clear that there is real chemistry there. The problem is >one of experience. I have a similiar problem with the R/Hr SHIP, though I disagree with the idea that bickering/arguing necessarily equals chemistry. To me their disagreements are a sign that they have different values not to mention rather serious communication problems. darkmatter: >In the H/R case, I see each as respecting significant parts of each >other, but also having little or no respect ... even a certain >contempt ... for other facets. For example, Ron sure seems to think >Hermione is well off her rocker when it comes to Elf rights, and >Hermione definitely sees Ron as, at least at times, incredibly >insensitive. I also see this as an obstacle towards a real relationship. Hermione is serious enough about House Elf rights that she mentions SPEW in reference to a future career. Ron, however, is quite closed-minded on the issue and highly critical of Hermione-- in contrast to Harry, who, while not particularly supportive of the idea, does not attempt to dissuade Hermione after a few comments early on in GoF. Furthermore, Hermione's tendency to be set off by offhand comments by Ron does not, IMO, bode well towards a future relationship. I can't help but feel, however, that Luna will somehow play role in shipping matters, though I'm sure she's been introduced in order to play another part in the overall plot as well. I don't consider myself a Ron/Luna shipper, but I noticed a clear contrast in the way she and Hermione react to Ron. For example when Ron snaps at Luna, she remains completely unfazed (ex ch 11) whereas Hermione just tends to snap right back. Luna also seems to regard Ron rather highly, again in contrast to Hermione who is so often frustrated with him. Honestly I think Ron and Hermione are far too critical of one another to make a relationship work. Either they would both have to change dramatically in the next two books or they will simply not be, in my opinion, a compatible pairing. Best, Erika (Wolfraven) For friendly shipping discussion join us at The Great Debate http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TheGreatDebate [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From coriolan at worldnet.att.net Tue Dec 14 04:54:50 2004 From: coriolan at worldnet.att.net (coriolan_cmc) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 04:54:50 -0000 Subject: FILK: Which Is Marine Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119862 It Is Marine (GoF, Chap. 23) To the tune of Tom Lehrer's Send the Marines Text and MIDI here: http://members.aol.com/quentncree/lehrer/marines.htm THE SCENE: The Entrance Hall. As he is leaving the Yule Ball, HARRY is accosted by CEDRIC DIGGORY CEDRIC: Hey-Harry! HARRY (coldly):Yeah? CEDRIC: Listen ... I owe you one for telling me about the dragons .. (music) You are too proud to ask About the second task So it's time for me to intervene Does your egg make a fuss? That's what we will discuss Out task will be marine! Just head straight for the bath Where you can do the math While in the prefect's basin you get clean Insert the egg aquatically As Myrtle floats neurotically Then you will learn our task is marine! So late at night, The password you'll recite At the statue of Boris Right where the fifth floor is And please be sure to watch out for Ms. Norris Though you suspect a hoax I don't indulge such jokes Or act like Slytherins corrupt and mean. Stop thinking it deception, And employ your perception! I do not tell you this thing so You will lose face in front of Cho It simply is a quid pro quo For our next task - Which is marine! - CMC HARRY POTTER FILKS http://home.att.net/~coriolan/hpfilks.htm From McGregorMax at ec.rr.com Tue Dec 14 05:01:49 2004 From: McGregorMax at ec.rr.com (mcmaxslb) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 05:01:49 -0000 Subject: Hermione's age In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119863 Yb: Maybe not the first, but he won't be waiting till July, and you can knock me over with a feather if I'm wrong too. See, Hermione is going to be learning to Apparate a whole SIX (6) (six) months before EITHER of the boys will. Boy, won't Ron be green with envy for this! mcmax: I meant that Harry is going to learn apparation in the summer before sixth year. Like I said this is to important a skill, indeed lifesaving, for Harry not to learn as soon as possible and half way thought sixth year is too long. The Order will teach Harry how to apparate long before that. And like the patronus charm he will very good at this. Yb: but actually FAILING...shows some major promise, and some possible ships developing from it as well. (Harry goes to comfort her, she bites his head off, he tells Ron (after Madame Pomfrey reattaches his head), Ron gets angry, confronts Hermione, and their verbal sparring is just what she needs to take her mind off things, thus all of my wishes come true, and all those bets I made pay off BIG TIME!!!) :) mcmax: In canon this is exactly the opposite of what happens. It is Ron who upsets Hermione and gets bitten and Harry who sooths her. Harry doesn't need Ron to handle Hermione for him in any way. Yb: So what could Hermione possibly fail?... What if she fails Apparition? It's probably like flying; you can read all you want to on the subject, but actually trying it is the only way to learn it. So she could finally flop at something,losing her perfect record... mcmax: This is something that could happen. Unlike fanon and Steven Kloves, JKR doesn't make Hermione perfect and I can see her having a problem with apparating and maybe she will have to work at it while Harry is poping all over the place and ever Ron gets the hang of it quickly. Interesting.. Any thoughts? ~Yb, who had a great time writing this. mcmax: You had some good ones,after wading though all the R/Hr stuff (<> I can't bear the thought of them together.) From Vivamus at TaprootTech.com Tue Dec 14 05:23:00 2004 From: Vivamus at TaprootTech.com (Vivamus) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 00:23:00 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Angry Harry in HBP? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200412140023171.SM01080@devbox> No: HPFGUIDX 119864 > Alla: > > Oh, it reminds me about Harry-centered discussion I had with > Del earlier.(Waves at Del) > > That is kind of strange. To her I was defending more > "herolike" Harry and now I find myself to be I suppose in the middle. > > No, I don't want Harry to be "Hero Harry" all the time. I > would find it extremely dissapointing and I am glad that JKR > did not go that way. > > I want to see more or less realistic emotions,while at the > same time see Harry overcoming the trials and tribulations of > his life in heroic way. > > He is growing up. He was hurt in the worst possible way not > once but many times and is he supposed to be calm and > cheerful all times? I disagree. I am extremely grateful to > JKR that she showed us Harry growing up in more or less > realistic way, while going through rebellious, angry, > "self-obsorbed" teenager phase of life. > > I have no doubt that he will overgrew it eventually, but if > this phase did not happen, I personally would have been upset > with the books. > > Harry is a Hero of the books, but I am glad that Rowling also > gave the character a chance to be a teenager. Vivamus: Thank you, Alla, for that excellent comment. One thing smacked me on the head while I was reading it, though, which made me wonder why it never occurred to me before. Probably elementary to the people here. Anyway, Harry has been through some really tough things growing up, but, as sometimes happen, they made him stronger and more sane, so he arrived at Hogwarts as a very well put-together kid -- as befits a budding hero, of course. JKR did a brilliant job of portraying this normal child's introduction into the wizarding world, and in the process, Harry and his friends go through all kinds of harrowing adventures and come up smiling. Harry even comes face-to-face with LV and fights him off. In the second book, he kills the basilisk, etc., etc., and continues to adventure through the books so far. Here is the thing that stunned me in your comments, Alla: Harry should not only be growing up, he has been getting stronger and more confident with each struggle he has faced. He now has a depth of experience that few adults of any age can match. Some things do only come with time, such as understanding what boys and girls are like when they grow up (I'm talking about personalities, kids) -- but much of the competence and confidence that characterizes adult interactions with the world is simply the knowledge born of experience that they will handle whatever comes. Harry has much more of a basis for that confidence than many, if not most, adults. Why on earth should he even care what Draco Malfoy (or any other student) thinks? In the end of OOtP, you see some of that casual contempt come out, briefly. In HBP, Harry is going to be 16, but he's already seen as much of war as anyone ever could, short of actually having to commit atrocities himself. He has led troops into battle, saved lives, had his life saved, and made stupid mistakes that have caused the death of someone he loved, and might have caused a lot more harm than that. Does it not make sense that Harry will be somewhat remote with respect to Draco and other students? This is completely different from Harry's own emotional struggles from the loss of Sirius, as he goes through the grieving process. With all he has been through, I wonder if he will not feel something like an old man as he looks at the shining young faces who look to him for leadership, and possibly understand DD a little bit. Draco is just a bug to be swatted, if he gets in Harry's way. Is there any way they can be serious rivals anymore? Can ANY student -- even a newly ginned up, super evil TR clone, introduced for the HBP -- be a serious rival for Harry? If that's the case, who is going to be his foil -- Bellatrix? They couldn't spend any time together without trying to kill each other. Lucius could if he escapes, as was suggested would happen in OOtP. Who else? An Umbridge now working for the DEs? Ah, well, it's food for thought, isn't it? Vivamus From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 14 03:47:10 2004 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 03:47:10 -0000 Subject: Guarding the Stone In-Reply-To: <02F380D1-4AC1-11D9-8177-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119865 Kneasy: > This isn't a new subject, it's been pored over often enough in the past, but the recent thread discussing the Stone, immortality and Voldy - particularly the possibility that DD used the Stone as bait, encouraged me to drag it out from the back of the cupboard and give it a bit of a polish. > Many fans have commented that the series of obstacles guarding the Stone are, to put it mildly, pretty pathetic. If three largely untrained children using just *one* simple spell can't be kept out, what chance of preventing Voldy from reaching the inner sanctum? > None, is the answer. [major snip] >I think DD was watching Quirrell and the Trio every step of the way. I think it was DD and not the Mirror that caused the Stone to be placed in Harry's pocket. And since DD is able to become invisible without the need for invisibility cloaks he may even have been physically present and it was he that slipped it into Harry's pocket. Off-hand I can't think of a safer place for the Stone than on DD's person, can you? [another major snip] >[Voldemort] *has* to be knocked back, delayed until Harry gets more magic under his belt. The Stone stratagem will do it. >It'll lure Voldy out and Harry's protection will make certain he's sent back to the state he was in after Godric's Hollow. You don't think that it was mere chance that the protections for the Stone could be circumvented by the Trio do you? > Not likely! Not with Puppetmaster!DD in charge.< Betsy: Okay, so this is a tiny bit delayed (weekend away from computer), but I've recently reread SS (all page numbers will refer to the American paperback edition)and had a lot of thoughts on this very subject. I agree with you, Kneasy, that Dumbledore was using the Stone as bait. But I differ greatly on who the bait was actually for, and what Harry's role was in the matter. First of all, there are two big things we learn about Dumbledore in OotP: 1) The man is a genius at thinking on his feet (the scene where Harry is confronted about the DADA club in chpt. 27); 2) Contrary to popular belief, Dumbledore is intent on keeping Harry protected from Voldemort (the "I didn't want to burden you with your destiny while you're still so young" speech in chpt. 37). The second point goes a long way to contradict Harry's theory at the end of SS, "It's almost like [Dumbledore] thought I had the right to face Voldemort if I could..." (pg 302). I think that in actuality the very last thing Dumbledore wanted was for Harry to confront Voldemort. Which makes sense -- Voldemort is one of the most powerful wizards of the time, and Harry's an eleven year old boy. And Harry very nearly died in the confrontation that did occur; he was in a coma for three days. So why the relatively easy obstacles instead of an impregnable safe? And why did Dumbledore make an announcement at the opening feast that for all intents and purposes pointed out the start of the obstacle course with a big neon sign? My theory is that Dumbledore wasn't merely guarding the Stone; he was setting up a trap to entice whomever had tried to steal the Stone from Gringotts in the first place. I further theorize that there was some sort of alarm that alerted Dumbledore when the first obstacles had been breached so that he could arrive on the scene and capture the unknown DeathEater. (More on the alarm theory later.) I doubt that Dumbledore realized that Voldemort himself was going to go for the Stone. Remember, Quirrell broke into Gringotts on his own, so even if some sort of magical thumbprint was left behind, it wouldn't point to Voldemort's direct involvement. It wouldn't surprise me if there'd been random rumblings from hidden DeathEaters attempting to locate and revive Voldemort over the ten years or so Voldemort had been missing. IIRC the LeStanges and Crouch, Jr. were caught in just such an action. I theorize that Dumbledore and co. would have seen the Gringotts break-in as a similar activity. And I think they'd be very interested in not merely thwarting a previously unknown DeathEater, but capturing him as well. Now, as to the time-line: At some point after lunch Dumbledore gets a message from the Ministry. (He gets the message after the last exam for the First Years, so I'm assuming it's towards the end of the school day.) According to Professor McGonagall, Dumbledore "flew off for London at once." (pg 267) The word "flew" would imply Dumbledore did not Apparate, but probably traveled by thestral. McGonagall also tells Potter et al that Dumbledore isn't planning to return until the next day. In other words, he's making a trip of it, and she doesn't seem to think that a possible threat to the Stone warrants bringing him back early. Harry assumes that the message from the Ministry is fake, "...I bet the Ministry of Magic will get a real shock when Dumbledore shows up," (pg 268) but I think the note is real and Quirrell/Voldemort just bided their time until Dumbledore got called away on legitimate business. Otherwise, Dumbledore would realize something was wrong as soon as he showed up at the MoM and probably Apparate to Hogsmeade ASAP. Since the quest for the Stone doesn't occur until well into the evening there was plenty of time for Dumbledore to return if the note was fake. That's why I theorize that there was some sort of alarm on the obstacles. Either Dumbledore was alerted himself, or McGonagall as his second in command, was alerted and called Dumbledore. I'm sure Dumbledore returned as soon as he could, but you can't Apparate onto Hogwart's grounds (thank you, Hermione), and at the time I don't think he was aware that Harry had gone after the DeathEater himself. I think it was a terrible shock for him to come through the front doors and see Hermione and Ron, dirty, injured, and panicked. Being as quick on his feet as he is, I'm sure Dumbledore realized what had happened, "Harry's gone after him, hasn't he?" (pg. 302) and immediately took off to rescue Harry. The last thing Dumbledore would've wanted was for Harry to go after the DeathEater himself. First because Harry was pure enough to not want to Stone for his own use (a purity a DeathEater by definition could never have) and thereby able to actually free the Stone from the mirror. Second, killing Harry would be a mighty coup on any DeathEater's part, and again, Harry is only eleven years old. Hardly a challenge for a wizard strong enough to break into Gringotts. So Harry's actions actually went a long way to royally mess up Dumbledore's carefully laid plans. I do think Dumbledore was proud of how well Harry handled himself, hence the praise at the final feast. But the more we learn about Dumbledore, the less I see him as an omniscient puppetmaster. Okay, so I've blathered on enough. And I have two billion and six posts left to read. *g* --Betsy, who's spent far more time than is entirely healthy trying to get into Dumbledore's head. From McGregorMax at ec.rr.com Tue Dec 14 06:19:30 2004 From: McGregorMax at ec.rr.com (mcmaxslb) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 06:19:30 -0000 Subject: Angry Harry in HBP? In-Reply-To: <200412140023171.SM01080@devbox> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119866 > Draco is just a bug to be swatted, if he gets in Harry's way. Is there any way they can be serious rivals anymore? Can ANY student -- even a newly ginned up, super evil TR clone, introduced for the HBP -- be a serious rival for Harry? Always good to see that you are not the only one to notices something and this something is the increasing irrelevance of Drago Malfoy. If you have been paying attention to the books you see that Drago's presence has steady decreased and he is little more that an irritant to Harry. > > If that's the case, who is going to be his foil -- Bellatrix? > Vivamus aahh Voldemort? From javalorum at yahoo.ca Tue Dec 14 03:54:38 2004 From: javalorum at yahoo.ca (javalorum) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 03:54:38 -0000 Subject: Angry Harry in HBP? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119867 Alla wrote: > No, I don't want Harry to be "Hero Harry" all the time. I would > find it extremely dissapointing and I am glad that JKR did not > go that way. > > I want to see more or less realistic emotions,while at the same > time see Harry overcoming the trials and tribulations of his life > in heroic way. Actually, I don't get that fascinated over "hero" books either. My favorite children's book is _Bill Bergeson, Master Detective_ by Astrid Lingrin from Sweden (this is very hard to find in North America, though), and the main character Bill is a good detective, but he's really just a normal, somewhat dreamy and imaginative kid who talks to himself a lot. I only made comparison with LOTR because I think HP is a "hero" book. At the end of each HP book, it is always Harry, and most of the time, only Harry, saves the day. The truth is I'd rather see all HP stories more like SS, where everybody learns and contributes, with Harry being the cental character. In ootp, the especially disappointing thing is that none of Harry's most trusted friends were unconscious before the real battle begins. I guess the story's setup required Harry to be the hero, whether he likes it or not, ever since "the boy who lived", because, he is special, he's different from everybody else. I don't know why he has to be the "lonely hero" but this is more of author's choice. > Could you please clarify? Which reasons that got Harry upset did > you consider to be not logical or understandable? Because I found > all of them to be logical and understandable. Oops, I knew I babbled too much without clarification again. :) I think the whole ootp story, ever since Chapter 1, is built based on Dumbledore's mistake, of not understanding teenagers and thinking he could just leave Harry out of the whole thing. I don't buy that. I think being an educator (and a pretty good one such as himself), missing that is very irresponsible, or downright insulting. It's kind of like not telling a 12-year-old that his cat had died, when the kid obviously had gone through enough, and mature enough to handle the truth. And that has not counted teenager's own brain, which is smart and curious enough to try to figure out things without being told. It's a life lesson should be learned, with parental guidance. Being an educator, how long does he think he can get away with not letting people grow up? He chose to not only leave himself out, but also make sure nobody stays close. And if you take notice, nobody in this book really was there for Harry. Even Sirius, I think in Chapter 22, after Harry had the very disturbing dream of biting Mr Weasley which turned out to be true, he told Sirius about it, and was obviously desperate. Yet all Sirius said was "you need sleep" and left the room. Even if Sirius was not allowed to say anything, shouldn't he at least stay with Harry a bit longer? He's the closest thing to a parent Harry had, yet he threw an answer like that and left the room. And look what happened after? Harry couldn't sleep for the whole night, and probably hated himself to death. You can argue that Sirius, being a bachelor himself, didn't know how to care for children, or was just angry for not able to do anything. But I would imagine this is basic human interaction. You shouldn't even treat your friends that way. The same goes for all other adults in that house. Yes, there's this order from Dumbledore, but they don't have to stay away, unless they're so immature they were afraid of him too (but the truth, as it turned out with Dumbledore's explanation, which they all should have known from the beginning, is that Harry's not harmful). They just seem to choose to be indifferent. I can't imagine a 15-year-old Harry can be that good an actor that no one even notices his stress and depression. Unless, this is all a distorted view of Harry's. And this is how HE sees other people (they didn't really behave that way). That'll be interesting but I think a better explanation, as I mentioned before, is the author's choice of setting for this story. There has to be some sort of mystery throughout the story, and a big secret to be revealed at the end. And Harry better behaves like normal teenager, which is, hum, how about, angry? Aren't all teenagers supposed to be angry anyway? So, everything's ready except for a reason to have the big secret and being angry all the time. How about making Dumbledore not telling and keep Harry guessing the whole way through? That'll sure keep the readers on the edge of their seats, and provides a good reason for Harry's anger. Imagine if it was done the other way around, if Dumbledore came to his senses and thought of Harry as an independent, intelligent, mature boy just like any other 15-year-old, and shared with him some of the information, or partial insights into the big problem at hand. (At least say, "you know, your dreams might be sent from Voldemort, so go practise Occlumency to block them. They're NOT real." That could have been enough to avoid a lot of things.) The only storylines left would be Umbridge, Grawp and DA Study Group. Maybe that's just not enough in the author's eyes though. Anyway, just my 2 cents. Thanks! Java From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Tue Dec 14 04:57:51 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 20:57:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: Hermione's age In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041214045751.66923.qmail@web53103.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119868 > Yb: > Maybe not the first, but he won't be waiting till > July, and you can knock me over with a feather if I'm > wrong too. See, Hermione is going to be learning to > Apparate a whole SIX (6)(six) months before EITHER of > the boys will. Boy, won't Ron be green with envy for > this! Juli: I don't think Ron will be green with envy, already most of his brothers know how to and I don't see him acting with any envy, actually he doesn't like how Fred and George apparate every minute. I got my drivers license after most of my friends, and it didn't bother me at all, I just didn't want to drive. > So Hermione has probably been studying like mad over > the summer to prepare for this. She's read every book > she can find, maybe even a manual, or a summer class > of some sort. So she's got all the paper part down. A > few weeks into the school year, maybe McGonnagall > takes her aside for some training; perhaps there's a > class at Hogwarts that allows of-age wizards to > practice; then the first Hogsmeade visit (Halloween), > she takes the test at the Apparation Branch that is > surely there. It's the largest all-wizard settlement > in the UK, of course they'd have one. And if they > don't, perhaps she could Floo to the MoM for a > Saturday. Juli You're right, probably by July or August Hermione will know everything there is to know about apparition, but remember Hermione isn't that good with practical magic (flying brooms, the DADA exam Lupin gave them), so maybe apparition is just one of these when she won't be the best at the school, and maybe she'll have to wait for Ron and Harry. > Perhaps DD can make him an "Apparating Permit" that > allows him to apparate legally though he's underage? That's possible, since DD is now on the MoM's good side (I'll be surprised if they didn't ask him to be Minister) he can ask for special favors like allowing Harry to do magic outside Hogwarts. The MoM must know the danger Harry's at, probably some know the prophecy so it's in everyone's best interest to keep Harry safe until he's able to vanquish LV for good. > Here are some things I want to know: > Will somebody get in trouble for apparating > illegally? Yes, they can get a fine: (GoF Ch6 The Portkey)Arthur is telling Harry about some illegal apparation where they got splinched: "Were they okay?" he asked, startled. "Oh yes," said Mr. Weasley matter-of-factly. "But they got a heavy fine, and I don't think they'll be trying it again in a hurry. You don't mess around with Apparition. There are plenty of adult wizards who don't bother with it. Prefer brooms - slower, but safer." My bet is that Draco and his hang will be the first to get in trouble. > Will someone splinch themselves? (Neville is a very > likely candidate for this.) Nope, at least I don't think so, Neville has shown great improvement over the years, he can even cast a Patronus now, and he fought bravely at the battle of the DoM. Juli From patientx3 at aol.com Tue Dec 14 09:05:17 2004 From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 09:05:17 -0000 Subject: Themes in OotP (was Re: Angry Harry in HBP?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119869 Java wrote: >>I think the whole ootp story, ever since Chapter 1, is built based on Dumbledore's mistake, of not understanding teenagers and thinking he could just leave Harry out of the whole thing. I don't buy that. [snip] Being an educator, how long does he think he can get away with not letting people grow up? << HunterGreen: And the thing was (and this is one of the things that annoyed me a lot with OotP) that he was inconsistently treating Harry like a child. On the one hand he thought Harry was too young to handle the information, but on the other hand he thinks Harry is old enough to take care of himself after a tramatic experience and handle being left in the dark. Most of the adults in Harry's life have this double- standard: "well, he can't join the order, he's too young", but the next moment he's supposed to learn Occulmency, something that's VERY difficult, and he's supposed to be able to deal with any problems he has by himself, or by asking other children, since he has no access to a trusted adult by the end of the book. No wonder the DoM catastrophy happened. The only explanation I can think of for Dumbledore's behavior is that the reason he didn't tell Harry about the prophecy in the beginning of the book had more to do with him than with Harry (as in, he was procrastinating about having such an awkward conversation). Although he claims the opposite (I believe) its sort of like he forgot all about Harry in OotP. Preparing to fight Voldemort took center-stage, and although Harry is involved with that to some degree, Dumbledore seemed like he didn't care about Harry's well-being at all. (shades of PuppetMaster!Dumbledore, perhaps) Java: >>And if you take notice, nobody in this book really was there for Harry. Even Sirius, I think in Chapter 22, after Harry had the very disturbing dream of biting Mr Weasley which turned out to be true, he told Sirius about it, and was obviously desperate. Yet all Sirius said was "you need sleep" and left the room.<< HunterGreen: That scene seemed odd to me when I first read it. I didn't think Harry would go to anyone at all for help, and when he actually did, its rather awful that Sirius did *nothing* for him. I think, though, that Sirius gets too much credit sometimes, he's not often (or ever) shown as someone affectionate or gentle. He can help Harry in the ways that he did in GoF (by providing generic advice and information), but as emotions go, the guy doesn't even have a handle on his own issues. He may just be too unaware to know what to say to Harry. Still, its ridiculous that he just brushed it aside. Java: >>The same goes for all other adults in that house. Yes, there's this order from Dumbledore, but they don't have to stay away<< HunterGreen: They certainly could take some time to talk to him. Just sit down and talk to him like a person rather than just telling him what he is and isn't allowed to know, and what he needs to do and needs to concern himself with. I don't know if it was written purposely to further the angry-Harry storyline or not, but it is an awful lot of adults behaving irresponsibly. Java: >>At least say, "you know, your dreams might be sent from Voldemort, so go practise Occlumency to block them. They're NOT real."<< HunterGreen: Yes, that would have been nice. The whole situation was horrifically mismanaged. Harry all year is having dreams/flashes of things that are ACTUALLY HAPPENING, and one of his dreams saves Mr. Weasley's life. Now, after all this, obviously if he has another dream he's not going to disregard it. I don't understand why no adult came to Harry and told him what to do if he had a vision. The solution was "teach Harry occulmency so he doesn't have any more visions.", but there was no back-up plan. (from what I understand of occulmency, I'm not even sure Harry could block off his mind to implanted dreams from Voldemort, it seems too different from the way Occ. is normally used). I don't know if the whole thing was just a setup for Angry!Harry, a setup for Sirius to die, or just a way to drag out the telling of the prophecy one more book (from a literary sense it works better at the end of OotP, but from a logical sense, it fits better at the end of GoF). Personally, after reading OotP a second time, I think of it as simply a transistional book. That its about Harry seeing his place in the scheme of things and having to accept that. -HunterGreen (Rebecca) From Vivamus at TaprootTech.com Tue Dec 14 10:09:26 2004 From: Vivamus at TaprootTech.com (Vivamus) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 05:09:26 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Angry Harry in HBP? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041214050960.SM01080@devbox> No: HPFGUIDX 119870 > > If that's the case, who is going to be his foil -- Bellatrix? > > Vivamus > > mcmaxslb: > aahh Voldemort? Vivamus: LV is his ultimate enemy, and has been, of course. I mean, with whom will he fence on a daily basis? Snape and Draco have filled that function in the past, but (if Harry ever thinks clearly about it) Snape really is on the same side as Harry, even though they despise each other, and Draco is just a whiny, ultra-spoiled rich brat, not worth attention. If HBP is not going to be all CAPSLOCK!Harry, with him screaming at people who don't deserve it, then he needs someone to oppose on a daily basis. He can't be having regular confrontations with LV. IF he has one in HBP, it will only be one -- and he may not. LV is still so far beyond Harry that another real confrontation seems unlikely. Granted, JKR can certainly pull it off -- She can do ANYTHING she wants, and if she reads this list, as I'm sure she does, I hope she realizes that her fans do trust her, as quarrelsome as we may seem, sometimes. Perhaps Snape will continue to be horrible to Harry, getting worse instead of better -- actually, that makes sense, doesn't it? To Snape, Harry (1) is a spoiled brat who couldn't focus enough to even TRY to master Occlumency, (2) endangered his (Snape's) life by trying to communicate with him in front of a bunch of DE kids, and (3) absolutely confirmed Snape's worst suspicions about him by rushing off to the DoM. That is all on top of Snape's history with Harry's parents, and Harry looking into Snape's worst memories. IF that's the case, Harry will be struggling with (1) grieving for Sirius, (2) feeling guilty over being made a fool of by LV, (3) having to face the "kill or be killed" interpretation of the prophecy (which may or may not be correct, but it is the interpretation he has), and on top of all this the rising conviction that Snape must be a bad guy, because he is so "unreasonably" nasty to Harry. Vivamus, who is *really* ready to read the next book, and hopes all this speculation hasn't messed up JKR's writing at all From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Tue Dec 14 11:37:29 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 06:37:29 -0500 Subject: I said I would be the first to admit it... Message-ID: <000a01c4e1d1$4bb73990$b7c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 119871 R.M. McDougal was right. Hermione's birthday *is* 1979. CathyD TrentonON [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From elfundeb at comcast.net Tue Dec 14 12:58:50 2004 From: elfundeb at comcast.net (Debbie) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 12:58:50 -0000 Subject: Longbottoms/Lestranges/Bagman/Lockhart (plus Rookwood & Fudge) In-Reply-To: <991F7046-4D15-11D9-999F-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119872 ::grabs mouldy old FEATHERBOAS and rushes to join the Longbottom party:: In my mind, this is the most intriguing bit of information JKR has revealed yet. * The Lestranges "were very definitely sent after Neville's parents." * This tidbit "touches on the Prophecy and how many people knew about it." * The Lestranges were not in on the secret. > Jen Reese wrote: Whew! This wasn't what I expected to hear. I've always believed > the Lestranges attacked Neville's parents to get information about > the prophecy, to get an explanation of why LV turned to vapour at GH. Well, no one ever seems to have questioned the explanation that Frank Longbottom was tortured for information about LV's whereabouts. Even Voldemort himself, in the graveyard, praises the Lestranges for attempting to find him. So it seems reasonable to assume that Frank had been sent to search for Vapormort, either in his capacity as an Auror or for the Order, and that spies were aware of that fact. Since espionage at the Ministry is much more appealing to me, I surmise that Frank was acting as an Auror in searching for Vapormort. Of course, this doesn't preclude the existence of dual motives. ;-) As imamommy points out: > Yes, but DD said something about the attacks on the Longbottoms > coming just when the wizarding community was starting to feel > safe...so probably not until at least a significant number of DE's > had been arrested. Agreed; the DEs engaged in plenty of mayhem -- some of it for fun, we are told -- and I would expect that people would not feel safe until a period of time had elapsed without any more attacks. The phrasing "beginning to feel safe" also suggests the passage of some time (lone enough to remove any Fidelius Charm or Disillusionment Charm that might have been protecting the Longbottoms). Which gives Frank enough time to return from his search for Voldemort (IMO, successful, since Dumbledore seems to have always known where Voldemort was hiding). So, who did the sending? dcgmck wrote: > Barty, Jr. sprang to mind for me as well when I first read JKR's > latest teasers. Though young, he put me very much in mind of Tom > Riddle at Hogwarts: accomplished yet dissatisfied with the > recognition (and lack thereof). He is clearly fueled by an enormous > amount of hate, especially for his father. This combination of talent > and animosity makes him an excellent choice as favored pet for LV. It > also puts him in perfect position to discredit Crouch, Sr. in a way > unavailable to anyone else. I absolutely love this theory that Barty Jr. masterminded it all. It's so in character for him. The problem I see is that Barty Jr. was there and therefore cannot accurately be said to have "sent" the Lestranges. It could be sloppy wordsmithing on JKR's part, but maybe not. So if not Barty Crouch Jr., who else? Why not Fudge? Oh, wait. SSSusan has beaten me to the punch: > What about Fudge? Is there any way he could've had a role in this, > does anyone think? He definitely had motivation, if even back then he coveted the MoM position. He would have loved to take out the heir apparent to the job. The Ministry's actions in OOP should make clear that Fudge has few scruples (even if it was Umbridge who sicced the Dementors on Harry). Fortunately for him, nobody asked Barty Crouch about the attack while he was under the influence of Veritaserum at the end of GoF, but don't you think Fudge was just a mite too anxious to feed Barty's soul to the Dementor? The problem with Fudge as a candidate, though, is that there's really no evidence that he was a DE, or that he knew or cared about the Prophecy. But on the other hand, he might have planted the idea in the head of another Ministry employee who *was* a DE. Or, there's Kneasy's suggestion: > What information could Bagman have that would interest a Voldy spy already inside the Ministry? Bagman wasn't working at the Ministry then, though he had expectations - he says that Rookwood offered to help. Yet it was Old Rookwood - a friend of Bagman's father - he was passing the information to. Is Bagman just an associate of young Barty or does he have a more > significant role? And what information could he possibly have had that > someone working in the MoM didn't have? I think Bagman is a bagman, whether he's taking bets for the goblins or passing information for the DEs. The most important thing about his trial is, IMO, that we learn he was passing information, and Rookwood was collecting it. Rookwood is a very plausible candidate for the role of sender, I think. Rookwood was not brought into custody until some time after Voldemort's fall, as it was Karkaroff who tipped off the Ministry. Also, since he was in Azkaban, he wasn't on the receiving end of Voldemort's "Why didn't you try to find me?" lament in the graveyard. Not to mention that he's probably seen the prophecy orb sitting on the shelf at the Department of Mysteries. And someone with a network of spies might well know about the prophecy, say, from Lucius Malfoy, even if Voldemort didn't confide in him. One of the best things about this clue is the revival of interest in my favorite Memory Charm theories. Neri wrote: > The Barty Jr possibility again raises the "something rotten in the > Ministry" scenario. Yes, but the question is just what was rotten there? Did someone at the Ministry with an agenda order the assaults, or was the Order simply riddled with spies? > The bubblegum puzzler suggests that the big mystery about the attack > is not necessarily WHO dunnit, but WHY. As I wrote here before, the > secret that the Longbottoms try to pass to Neville must be something > critical and new, or it will be an anticlimax when it is finally > revealed. It might be the way to get rid of Voldy. And after the > demise of the Crouches, possibly the Longbottom are the only people > who still know the details. I'm not a big fan of the droobles gum-as-message theories, as I think the wrappers stand for something much more poignant. Kneasy wrote: > While we're looking at the Longbottom affair - they are supposed to > have lost their memories/sanity while under torture. All very possible. > But I keep remembering who is the maestro of the Obliviate! spell - > Lockhart. A devious, ambitious, vain, unscrupulous creep. Zapping > helpless people would be just up his street. Could he have been > involved? If he was it would imply that the DEs thought it best that > the Longbottoms didn't remember something important - besides the > identity of their torturers, that is. I never have been able to figure > out why Bella didn't kill them, it's unlikely it would have bothered > her much. One of my oldest (and very few original) theories is that the elder Longbottoms were *not* tortured into insanity, but instead are victims of Memory Charms. In one version of this theory, the Lestranges escaped and were rounded up later after the Ministry destroyed their minds breaking through the Memory Charm. In another version, the Memory Charms themselves are responsible for their condition. The reappearance of Lockhart in OOP, aside from providing comic relief, seems only there to reinforce to the reader that Memory Charms can cause insanity. Even though the Longbottoms' condition was strikingly different from Lockhart's, perhaps that reflects their different personalities. There's a dignity to Alice Longbottom that Lockhart will never have. Under either version, though, the Longbottoms will not be able to tell us *why* they were tortured. We'll have to figure it out for themselves. Given this new information, though, one reason to have put a Memory Charm on the Longbottoms rather than kill them outright (always a nagging question about this episode) would be that the Lestranges did it just as the Order (read: Snape) arrived so that they or someone else could return another day to break the charm and find out the information. I'll have to think on this some more, but I don't have the time. Pippin wrote: > Dumbledore says Snape defected before the fall of Voldemort, > and the attack on the Longbottoms happened afterward, so not > possible, unless Dumbledore is lying. I think more likely Snape > was involved in rescuing Neville, and Neville was memory > charmed to forget. But he still has a subconscious memory of > Snape drawing his wand. I, too, think it's likely that Snape rescued Neville, but believe the Memory Charm was imposed by his attackers just as Snape arrived on the scene, so that Neville's earliest memory is a feeling of terror as Snape stood over him with a wand. Debbie From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Tue Dec 14 13:30:16 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 05:30:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: JKR's cryptic answer: "Who sent the Lestranges to the Longbottoms?" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041214133016.21638.qmail@web53103.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119873 --- cubfanbudwoman wrote: > Barty, Jr., in his trial scene, was nothing more than a kid > screaming, crying and begging his father to spare him, pleading and > denying his guilt. He didn't go off calmly or willingly, declaring > loyalty to Voldy, the way Bella, for instance, went. Are you > arguing > that this was totally an act on BJ's part, his attempt to try to > gain > sympathy for himself and/or generate an outcry against his father? > > Siriusly Snapey Susan Yes, that's what I assumed when I read the book. Magda __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From templar1112002 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 14 15:28:38 2004 From: templar1112002 at yahoo.com (templar1112002) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 15:28:38 -0000 Subject: Hermione's Flying skills and Apparition (was her age) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119874 > Yb wrote: > So what could Hermione possibly fail?... What if she fails > Apparition? It's probably like flying; you can read all you want to on the subject, but actually trying it is the only way to learn it. So she could finally flop at something,losing her perfect record... > > > mcmax wrote: > This is something that could happen. Unlike fanon and Steven Kloves, JKR doesn't make Hermione perfect and I can see her having a problem with apparating and maybe she will have to work at it while Harry is poping all over the place and ever Ron gets the hang of it quickly. *******Perhaps this has been discussed in this site some time ago, I run a search and as usual nothing relevant came up... I apologize if so. But I just couldn't help my writing a reply to what I consider one of the biggest misinterpretations with regards to Hermione: her flying skills are not good, mainly because she cannot learn it from books. I can understand where part of that belief comes from, the reader might be left with that impression because of Harry's POV in SS, but she most definetely is not 'that' bad at it. I guess that many assumed that her fear of learning how to fly in her first lesson in PS was never overcome. But then, how do you read the scene I quote below?: "...They each (the trio) seized a broomstick and kicked off into the air, soaring into the midst of the cloud of keys. They grabbed and snatched, but the bewitched keys darted and dived so quickly it was almost impossible to catch one. Ron went speeding in the direction that Harry was pointing, crashed into the ceiling, and nearly fell off his broom. Ron dived, Hermione rocketed upward, the key dodged them both, and Harry streaked after it; it sped toward the wall, Ron and Hermione's cheers echoed around the high chamber. They landed quickly, and Harry ran to the door, the key struggling in his hand. ..." SS pages 348/349, p/b SE. As a matter of fact, it's Ron who is not so good at flying in this scene -he crashed into the ceiling. Hermione managed to fly with only one hand on the broom while trying to snatch at the keys, she rocketed upward when she was ordered to, and then she landed quickly. Or perhaps, some readers think that she is not good at flying or that she is scared of flying because of the Buckbeak scene in PoA? Let's read it again: "...The executioner! He's gone to get the dementors! This is it, Hermione -- Hermione put her hands on Buckbeak's back and Harry gave her a leg up. Then he placed his foot on one of the lower branches of the bush and climbed up in front of her. Her pulled Buckbeak's rope back over his neck and tied it to the other side of his collar like reins. 'Ready?' he whispered to Hermione. 'You'd better hold on to me --' He nudged Buckbeak's sides with his heels. Buckbeak soared straight into the dark air. Harry gripped his flanks with his knees, feeling the great wings rising powerfully beneath them. Hermione was holding Harry very tight around the waist; he could hear her muttering, 'Oh, no --I don't like this -- oh, I really don't like this --' Harry urged Buckbeak forward. They were gliding quietly toward the upper floors of the castle... Harry pulled hard on the left-hand side of the rope, and Buckbeak turned. Harry was trying to count the windows flashing past -- 'Whoa!' he said, pulling backward as hard as he could. Buckbeak slowed down and they found themselves at a stop, unless you counted the fact that they kept rising up and down several feet as the hippogriff beat his wings to remain airborne. 'Stand back!' Hermione called to him, and she took out her wand, still gripping the back of Harry's robes with her left hand. 'Alohomora!' ..." PoA, pages 413/4, p/b SE. Well, she didn't like flying Buckbeak in the beginning, but got used to it later on and even managed to do the Alohomora spell... To be fair, Harry didn't like flying Beacky the first time, either. Read on: "...Without warning, twelve-foot wings flapped open on either side of Harry; he just had time to seize the hippogriff around the neck before he was soaring upward. It was nothing like a broomstick, and Harry knew which one he preferred; the hippogriffs wings beat uncomfortably on either side of him, catching him under his legs and making him feel he was about to be thrown off; the glossy feathers slipped under his fingers and he didn't dare get a stronger grip; instead of the smooth action of his Nimbus Two Thousand, he now felt himself rocking backward and forward as the hindquarters of the hippogriff rose and fell with its wings. Buckbeak flew him once around the paddock and then headed back to the ground; this was the bit Harry had been dreading; he leaned back as the smooth neck lowered, feeling he was going to slip off over the beak, then felt a heavy thud as the four ill-assorted feet hit the ground. He just managed to hold on and push himself straight again. ..." PoA, page 117, p/b SE. Also, Hermione rode a Thestral to the MoM and she managed to dismount it in a more graceful manner than, say, Ron. To sum up, Canon!Hermione is a good flyer, or average at least, and doesn't whimper or whine when the ocassion calls for some flying. Fandon!Hermione is highly perceived as hating to fly or scared of doing so. And maybe that's the reason for this 'contamination' of views, or perhaps it's the popular and infamous belief that women are not good drivers, *chuckles*. Sooo, I hardly think that Apparition would be an issue for Hermione. I think that it would be a big deal for her (like any driver's licence is to any teenager :) ), but I doubt that she'll have problems learning it. As for the kids learning Apparation and how Jo would deal with that, I strongly think that she will not dwell on that for too long. The most she's done with explaining the magic behind a spell, so far, was with the Patronus and with the Summoning ones, which both coincidentally demand a lot of concentration in the beginning to be able to perform it 'casually' afterwards. And those two spells we know for sure that Harry and Hermione can manage with. Somehow, Jo has not let us know about Ron's Patronus yet. Marcela From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Tue Dec 14 16:17:06 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 16:17:06 -0000 Subject: McGonagall-ness (Re: Angry Harry in HBP?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119875 Alla wrote previously: >>> Have you EVER seen her acting nice and motherly to Harry during >>> the course of the series? She is fair, IMO but not kind. Maddy writes: > > Ah, but you're forgetting that she gave Harry his Nimbus 2000 in > > PS/SS and let him on the Quidditch team in his first year. And > > I'd say that's acting pretty kind. And yes, it probably was > > largely due to the fact that Harry showed great ability as a > > Seeker and she wanted to see Gryffindor win the Cup, but I think > > she wouldn't have done that for just anyone. Alla: > Minerva MAY feel affection for Harry, I just don't see it int he > books. Could you give me some canon on this one? > > I suppose her "I wil help you become an auror even if it will be > the last thing I do" counts, but besides that I cannot remember > anything. SSSusan: Absolutely, I think her "I will help you become an auror if it's the last thing I do" counts as an example of MM's care & concern for Harry. YES, she's royally ticked at Umbridge, but she's at least partially [and I think probably mostly] ticked on Harry's behalf. I think the broomstick gift shows concern, too, but since it can be viewed as merely promoting her Quidditch team's chances of victory, it carries a little less weight in the "McGonagall cares for Harry" evidence pile. On the other hand, I can think of a couple of other examples. I'm away from my books, so I can't include quotes, but when MM, Flitwick, Fudge & Hadrid are in the Three Broomsticks talking w/ Madam Rosmerta in PoA, MM gets teary-eyed talking about the Godric's Hollow/Sirius' betrayal situation. One *could* argue that this merely shows she was fond of James & Lily, but I think it carries over to caring for Harry, too. The best example I could think of offhand, though, is in GoF. Before Harry is about to embark upon the first TWT task, MM goes to great pains to make sure Harry knows it's okay if he doesn't do well. I don't think this was Gryffindor HoH talking to a Gryff student; I think it was actual concern for his safety & his feelings. A professor who didn't care about the student would likely have said nothing. Also, as soon as the task was over, MM rushed to him to congratulate him. She was beaming, if I recall. I think she's proud of him, but I think she's also very happy that he came through alive & well. She's *never* going to be a Molly, but I think we get glimpses of her caring for Harry. Siriusly Snapey Susan From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Tue Dec 14 16:51:02 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 16:51:02 -0000 Subject: Themes in OotP (was Re: Angry Harry in HBP?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119876 HunterGreen: > The whole situation was horrifically mismanaged. Harry all year is > having dreams/flashes of things that are ACTUALLY HAPPENING, and > one of his dreams saves Mr. Weasley's life. Now, after all this, > obviously if he has another dream he's not going to disregard it. I > don't understand why no adult came to Harry and told him what to do > if he had a vision. The solution was "teach Harry occulmency so he > doesn't have any more visions.", but there was no back-up plan. > (from what I understand of occulmency, I'm not even sure Harry > could block off his mind to implanted dreams from Voldemort, it > seems too different from the way Occ. is normally used). > I don't know if the whole thing was just a setup for Angry!Harry, a > setup for Sirius to die, or just a way to drag out the telling of > the prophecy one more book (from a literary sense it works better > at the end of OotP, but from a logical sense, it fits better at the > end of GoF). Personally, after reading OotP a second time, I think > of it as simply a transistional book. That its about Harry seeing > his place in the scheme of things and having to accept that. SSSusan: A nice analysis, Rebecca. I especially like the points you're making here at the end -- that it's just ILLOGICAL for no adult to have sat Harry down over this issue of visions. Heck, DD could have *written* to Harry about it, even if he feared being in the same room with him. A letter from DD would have gotten Harry's attention, I'm sure of it. A lot of OotP, I think, found the adults in Harry's life flat-out *uncomfortable* with things pertaining to Harry and VW2. They knew more than he; they weren't comfortable, to varying degrees, with telling him things; they weren't sure how to reconcile his having proven himself to be mature & capable with his young age & their fear for his future. It doesn't make their behaviors -- particularly their avoidance behaviors -- right or excusable, but I do think they may be fairly realistic behaviors for many people. They know some awful stuff; they're worried; they don't want to burden the poor tyke. Maybe they don't trust themselves to sit down & just chat with him because if he asks the wrong kind of question, they're going to feel bad about being evasive. It was WRONG to have behaved this way -- they could have at least TRIED spending time with him & talking, to see how it would go, but they didn't. Now, any adult who's been dreading a conversation with a child or a question from a child will probably identify with their feelings, but at least a couple of them should have risen above it and showed Harry some real support and willingness to talk about at least some of the difficult stuff. Or to be open about what couldn't be talked about. Sirius & Lupin did a measure of this at 12 GP, I would argue, but it wasn't enough, nor consistent throughout the year, and as you note, it wasn't there at ALL after the Mr. Weasley vision. There's no way a kid of 15, who thinks -- no, *knows* -- he just saved someone's life through his vision is going to just start working hard to stop having them without some kind of reasonable explanation from someone he trusts. Huntergreen's questions & final point about why JKR wrote OotP this way are interesting. Perhaps, as so many are saying, OotP just doesn't stand alone the way the other 4 are more capable of doing, and really functions more as a transitional book. I enjoyed OotP, but I am pretty easily entertained [just call me shallow]. Yet I still see the validity of some of the complaints being put forth about OotP. Would *all* of the adults really have been *this* stupid for a whole year? Is that credible? Siriusly Snapey Susan From stevejjen at earthlink.net Tue Dec 14 17:29:05 2004 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 17:29:05 -0000 Subject: McGonagall-ness (Re: Angry Harry in HBP?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119877 SSSusan: > The best example I could think of offhand, though, is in GoF. Before > Harry is about to embark upon the first TWT task, MM goes to great > pains to make sure Harry knows it's okay if he doesn't do well. I > don't think this was Gryffindor HoH talking to a Gryff student; I > think it was actual concern for his safety & his feelings. A > professor who didn't care about the student would likely have said > nothing. Also, as soon as the task was over, MM rushed to him to > congratulate him. She was beaming, if I recall. I think she's proud > of him, but I think she's also very happy that he came through alive > & well. > > She's *never* going to be a Molly, but I think we get glimpses of > her caring for Harry. Jen: And we actually have a quote when she speaks 'kindly' to Harry: "There's nothing wrong with it!" said Harry, his voice shaking slightly. "Honestly, Professor--" "You can't know that, Potter," said Professor McGonagall, quite kindly, "not until you've flown it, at any rate, and I'm afraid that's out of the question until we are certain that it has not been tampered with. I shall keep you informed." (POA, US, chap. 11, p. 232) Then there's the scene in POA where Harry asks McGonagall to sign his permission slip for Hogsmeade: "But I didn't say so," said Professor McGonagall, standing up and piling her papers neatly into a drawer. "The form clearly states that the parent or guardian must give permission." She turned to look at him, with an odd expression on her face. Was it pity? "I'm sorry Potter, but that's my final word. You had better hurry or you'll be late for your next lesson." (chap. 8, p. 150) ********* Like Maddie said, I believe McGonagall has a soft spot for Harry. But, like Lupin, she keeps her interactions with him 'professional' and doesn't promise him things she can't deliver. As much as I like the Sirius character, he was guilty of promising Harry many things he couldn't make good on, and in the end it hurt Harry deeply. McGonagall and Lupin are undemonstrative and may don't make attempts to be physically afectionate toward Harry, but they are steady, predictable and have Harry's best interest at heart. He doesn't have many adults in his life who don't *want* somthing from him, but these two try their best to support Harry and not put the burden of their own agendas on his life. Jen From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Dec 14 17:40:48 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 17:40:48 -0000 Subject: Themes in OotP (was Re: Angry Harry in HBP?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119878 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > > It was WRONG to have behaved this way -- they could have at least TRIED spending time with him & talking, to see how it would go, but they didn't. Now, any adult who's been dreading a conversation with a child or a question from a child will probably identify with their feelings, but at least a couple of them should have risen above it and showed Harry some real support and willingness to talk about at least some of the difficult stuff. Or to be open about what couldn't be talked about. > > Sirius & Lupin did a measure of this at 12 GP, I would argue, but it wasn't enough, nor consistent throughout the year, and as you note, it wasn't there at ALL after the Mr. Weasley vision. There's no way a kid of 15, who thinks -- no, *knows* -- he just saved someone's life through his vision is going to just start working hard to stop having them without some kind of reasonable explanation from someone he trusts. Would *all* of the adults really have been *this* stupid for a whole year? Is that credible? Pippin: You have to remember at least some of their efforts to offer support to Harry were thwarted. Harry declined to have tea with Mrs. Figg, who might have been able to answer some of his questions and let him know what was going on. Harry refused to use the mirror Sirius gave him. Neither Sirius nor McGonagall, nor DD seems comfortable offering emotional support if more is needed than their mere presence. Maybe it's the warrior culture thing. Spending time and talking -- does anybody except Hermione *ever* want to do that? Pippin From Gregory.Lynn at gmail.com Tue Dec 14 18:02:38 2004 From: Gregory.Lynn at gmail.com (Gregory Lynn) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 13:02:38 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Themes in OotP (was Re: Angry Harry in HBP?) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119879 On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 17:40:48 -0000, pippin_999 wrote: > Neither Sirius nor McGonagall, nor DD seems comfortable > offering emotional support if more is needed than their mere > presence. Maybe it's the warrior culture thing. Spending time and > talking -- does anybody except Hermione *ever* want to do that? > > Pippin Cho does, though that would seem to be for her own purposes. Ginny seems willing and able to talk sympathetically during that scene in the library with the chocolate eggs. One wonders what would have happened if they hadn't been interrupted. Actually, isn't there supposed to be a thing about interruptions? -- Gregory Lynn From stevejjen at earthlink.net Tue Dec 14 18:03:31 2004 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 18:03:31 -0000 Subject: Prewett Brothers Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119880 So now we know from JKR herself that Gideon and Fabian Prewett were definitely Molly's brothers, but they won't play a 'significant' role in the plot. Disappointing! I was expecting some intrigue. It still seems likely Fred and George were named after them, meaning the same first initials. You never hear any of the Weasleys talk about them, though. I figured the Prewetts were the reason Arthur knew about the Dark Mark hanging over a victim's house in the First War. Guess that could still be true, but if there's no big intrigue, why not mention it in GOF? It makes me wonder how many other little tidbits JKR leaves hanging for the same reason--they aren't necessary for the overall plot. They make an interesting story for one book or supply the necessary drama, but won't play any further. Just off the top of my head, here are some *possible* plot points and people who won't return in any significant way: 1) Luna's family, the Quibbler and all Luna's fantastic ideas. 2) Wormtail's silver hand (I hope this one has meaning for Wormtail paying off his life debt). 3) Krum and Fleur. 4) Ron's seer (?) abilities. 5) Cho 6) Alchemy and the PS 7) Birth order of the Weasleys. 8) Quidditch! 9) Kreacher 10) Droobles 11) What happens to a body and soul after a Dementor's Kiss Given all the important plot points we still have left to learn about--Godric's Hollow, the Prank, Snape's life as a DE, Dumbledore's trust of Snape, etc.--you wonder what JKR will have to leave out. Jen, who wishes *all* of it could be important to the plot and JKR would continue writing until every question is answered :). From hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu Tue Dec 14 18:06:20 2004 From: hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu (Bex) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 18:06:20 -0000 Subject: I said I would be the first to admit it... In-Reply-To: <000a01c4e1d1$4bb73990$b7c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119881 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Cathy Drolet" wrote: > R.M. McDougal was right. Hermione's birthday *is* 1979. > > CathyD > TrentonON I know... hurts, doesn't it? Admitting he was right about something, even if it is something so small. I swear, I will simply /die/ if I see a "told you so" post in the near future. ~Yb From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Tue Dec 14 18:07:06 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 18:07:06 -0000 Subject: Themes in OotP (was Re: Angry Harry in HBP?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119882 SSSusan: > It was WRONG to have behaved this way -- they could have at > least TRIED spending time with him & talking, to see how it > would go, but they didn't. Now, any adult who's been dreading a > conversation with a child or a question from a child will probably > identify with their feelings, but at least a couple of them should > have risen above it and showed Harry some real support and > willingness to talk about at least some of the difficult stuff. Or > to be open about what couldn't be talked about. > > Sirius & Lupin did a measure of this at 12 GP, I would argue, > but it wasn't enough, nor consistent throughout the year, and as > you note, it wasn't there at ALL after the Mr. Weasley vision. > There's no way a kid of 15, who thinks -- no, *knows* -- he just > saved someone's life through his vision is going to just start > working hard to stop having them without some kind of > reasonable explanation from someone he trusts. > > Would *all* of the adults really have been *this* stupid for a > whole year? Is that credible? Pippin: > You have to remember at least some of their efforts to offer > support to Harry were thwarted. Harry declined to have tea with > Mrs. Figg, who might have been able to answer some of his > questions and let him know what was going on. > > Harry refused to use the mirror Sirius gave him. > > Neither Sirius nor McGonagall, nor DD seems comfortable > offering emotional support if more is needed than their mere > presence. Maybe it's the warrior culture thing. Spending time and > talking -- does anybody except Hermione *ever* want to do that? SSSusan: But I'm not talking just about, or even primarily about, emotional support. That, too, if it's in the giver's nature -- but also just SOME vital information & answers and providing a *presence* in Harry's life. Jen R. just said in the post prior to this one that she believes McGonagall & Lupin are more *constant* for Harry than Sirius was and how important that is. I know your take on Lupin, Pippin, but as it doesn't match mine, I think Jen is right. As for the mirror, it's true that Harry refused to use it at first, but he also *forgot* about it. If he'd remembered it the night they ended up traipsing off to the DoM, do you really think he'd not have used it? And Mrs. Figg? Did he know anything about her role at the time he refused tea? [I don't recall the timing of the offer.] Again, I'm not talking about *just* someone to have tea with. I'm talking about someone HE really cares about, carving time out to listen to him and tell him SOME key stuff, even if they couldn't tell him all, rather than avoiding him or averting eyes and evading questions. Like what Sirius & Lupin did at 12GP, only consistently throughout the year. Perhaps even seeking *him* out on occasion. And especially after the Arthur attack. Siriusly Snapey Susan From griffin782002 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 14 18:55:21 2004 From: griffin782002 at yahoo.com (sp. sot.) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 10:55:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Muggle technology for communication? (Re: Jo's site) In-Reply-To: <20041211020855.62640.qmail@web53105.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041214185521.51334.qmail@web52706.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119883 --- javalorum wrote: > > Just curious, at time of great difficulty and war, > is it possible for > wizards to use muggle technology? I mean, > considering the other side > may not expect the usage of cellphones and such, > it's not likely > they'll try to monitor it (it's hard to track the > content of a call > if it's well ciphered anyway). Juli said: Even if a muggle born wizard-witch would bring a cell phone to Hogwarts it wouldn't work (look into JKR's website under FAQ), so why would the Order Members use them to communicate since their leader (DD) is usually at Hogwarts? Juli Griffin782002: Well, this is well known. But if a wizard wanted to use a cellphone in Hogwarts couldn't they operate by magic? Like Colin's camera? 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!? 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 hickengruendler at yahoo.de Tue Dec 14 19:01:27 2004 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 19:01:27 -0000 Subject: Prewett Brothers (and other possible insignificant plot-points) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119884 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jen Reese" wrote: > > So now we know from JKR herself that Gideon and Fabian Prewett were > definitely Molly's brothers, but they won't play a 'significant' > role in the plot. Disappointing! Hickengruendler: I thought so. But I'm not happy that I'm right. > Guess that could still be true, but if there's no big intrigue, > why not mention it in GOF? Hickengruendler: Yes, I wish she had included this information in the books. It would have made a lot of Molly's behaviour more understandable. (Not that the boggart doesn't serve the same purpose, but this information is even stronger regarding Molly's characterization). That's why I hope that she changes her mind and will publish her scribblings one day. > > > > Just off the top of my head, here are some *possible* plot points > and people who won't return in any significant way: > > 1) Luna's family, the Quibbler and all Luna's fantastic ideas. This I think will return. Maybe not the Quibbler and Luna's family (except that it will be mentioned), but I'm pretty sure her way of thinking out of the box will be useful again in either book 6 or 7. > 2) Wormtail's silver hand (I hope this one has meaning for Wormtail > paying off his life debt). Another important thing. Even if he doesn't kill Lupin with it, (or doesn't try to kill him), it will be a powerful weapon to use. (Although the question that is really nagging me, is if he has a silver claw when he turns rat). > 3) Krum and Fleur. We will see them again, too. JKR had already confirmed (during the march chat this year) that Krum will return (though not soon, which probably means book 7), and Fleur is already back in England and dating a Weasley. It's only a matter of time until Harry will see her again. Besides, I'm still thinking that the positive thing at the beginning of HBP will be Bill's and Fleur's wedding. > 4) Ron's seer (?) abilities. Personally, I never thought much about this theory. IMO, JKR used Ron's statements as clever foreshadowing, that's all. But we'll see. > 5) Cho Yes. I think her storyline is over. But she's still in Hogwarts for one year, maybe she and Harry will become friends. I hope so, since I feel sorry for Cho, (especially for the way she's treated in the fandom) and it would be nice if she leaves the series on a positive note. > 6) Alchemy and the PS Destroyed. IMO, the stone won't play a role anymore, neither will the CoS. > 7) Birth order of the Weasleys. ? > 8) Quidditch! I'm not sure what you mean by this. I think Harry will play Quidditch again, but I hope not, since the Quidditch sections always bore me. > 9) Kreacher According to JKR, we will learn what happened to Kreacher (and Grimmauld Place) very soon in HBP. > 10) Droobles I really love this theory. But sadly I agree that it's unlikely to become canon. > 11) What happens to a body and soul after a Dementor's Kiss I'm not sure if I really want to know. *Shudder* I've prepared myself for my favourite characters dying, but I don't want to see them soul- sucked. I hope JKR won't go that far and kill a good or even neutral character this way, but I'm not sure. Hickengruendler From stonehenge.orders at verizon.net Tue Dec 14 19:08:51 2004 From: stonehenge.orders at verizon.net (kjirstem) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 19:08:51 -0000 Subject: Muggle technology for communication? (Re: Jo's site) In-Reply-To: <20041214185521.51334.qmail@web52706.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119885 > --- javalorum wrote: > > I mean, considering the other side > > may not expect the usage of cellphones and such, > > Juli said: > Even if a muggle born wizard-witch would bring a cell > phone to Hogwarts it wouldn't work (look into JKR's > website under FAQ), so why would the Order Members use > them to communicate since their leader (DD) is usually > at Hogwarts? > > Griffin782002: > > Well, this is well known. But if a wizard wanted to use a cellphone >in Hogwarts couldn't they operate by magic? Like Colin's camera? > kjirstem: Colin's camera used film, so it was primarily a mechanical device. Cell phones are not. I don't think they would work at Hogwarts. (Which spares us the netspeak torture, yay!) From greatelderone at yahoo.com Tue Dec 14 19:18:31 2004 From: greatelderone at yahoo.com (greatelderone) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 19:18:31 -0000 Subject: Prewett Brothers (and other possible insignificant plot-points) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119886 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "hickengruendler" wrote: > Hickengruendler: > Yes, I wish she had included this information in the books. It would > have made a lot of Molly's behaviour more understandable. (Not that > the boggart doesn't serve the same purpose, but this information is > even stronger regarding Molly's characterization). That's why I hope > that she changes her mind and will publish her scribblings one day. GEO: Yes and her daughter can organize and publish them in a ten volume set called the History of the Wizarding World and then we can spend the next 20 years arguing over them and the original seven and trying to decipher the true intentions of Rowling. > It's only a matter of time until Harry will see her > again. Besides, I'm still thinking that the positive thing at the > beginning of HBP will be Bill's and Fleur's wedding. GEO: I think it's more likely a birthday party for Harry rather than a wedding especially for a couple who've only known each other for a year or so. > > 8) Quidditch! > > I'm not sure what you mean by this. I think Harry will play Quidditch > again, but I hope not, since the Quidditch sections always bore me. GEO: My guess is we'll expect less of Harry playing quidditch and possibly more emphasis on the coming war. From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Dec 14 19:28:20 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 19:28:20 -0000 Subject: Themes in OotP (was Re: Angry Harry in HBP?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119887 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > > SSSusan: > But I'm not talking just about, or even primarily about, emotional support. That, too, if it's in the giver's nature -- but also just SOME vital information & answers and providing a *presence* in Harry's life. > > And Mrs. Figg? Did he know anything about her role at the time he refused tea? [I don't recall the timing of the offer.] Again, I'm not talking about *just* someone to have tea with. I'm talking about someone HE really cares about, carving time out to listen to him and tell him SOME key stuff, even if they couldn't tell him all, rather than avoiding him or averting eyes and evading questions. < Pippin: Mrs. Figg wasn't an old friend, true. But she could have told Harry that the Order was keeping watch and couldn't let him know more directly because the Ministry would just love to catch them doing magic in front of Muggles. She could have told him that a safe place was being prepared and that he'd be sent for once it was ready. After the Arthur attack there's a problem. They don't want to let Voldemort know how much they know, and Dumbledore has already spotted him looking out through Harry's eyes. Dumbledore can't be sure Voldemort won't be able to read other people's minds through Harry's eyes, and only Snape can block him. Pippin From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Tue Dec 14 19:35:38 2004 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 19:35:38 -0000 Subject: Themes in OotP (was Re: Angry Harry in HBP?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119888 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > > Pippin: > Mrs. Figg wasn't an old friend, true. But she could have told Harry > that the Order was keeping watch and couldn't let him know > more directly because the Ministry would just love to catch them > doing magic in front of Muggles. She could have told him that a > safe place was being prepared and that he'd be sent for once it > was ready. > Hickengruendler: But Harry couldn't have known this. Well, maybe he could, if he had realized who the Arabella Dumbledore was talking about at the end of GoF really is. But on the other hand, he only knew her as Mrs Figg, and since the last name isn't that uncommon in Britain, I don't think he necessarily should have made the connection between Arabella Figg and Mrs Figg. Especially because of all the other things that were in his mind at this point. From his point of view, she was a mad old muggle-woman, who invited him for tea, and he couldn't expect her to know anything about Dumbledore or Voldemort. Maybe Mrs Figg could have given him some better hints, than just inviting him for tea. "I really want you to come Harry. I insist on it, it's about something that happened last June. I think you know what I mean." Something like this. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 14 19:39:33 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 19:39:33 -0000 Subject: Themes in OotP (was Re: Angry Harry in HBP?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119889 Pippin: snip. After the Arthur attack there's a problem. They don't want to let Voldemort know how much they know, and Dumbledore has already spotted him looking out through Harry's eyes. Dumbledore can't be sure Voldemort won't be able to read other people's minds through Harry's eyes, and only Snape can block him. Alla: True, there is a problem after Arthur's attack, but we are talking about not giving Harry any support during the summer, right? THAT in my opinion cannot be justified by anything. Who knows, maybe if Harry was in better emotional shape after summer, he would have easier time practicing Occlumency. From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Tue Dec 14 19:45:17 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 19:45:17 -0000 Subject: Themes in OotP (was Re: Angry Harry in HBP?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119890 Pippin: > Mrs. Figg wasn't an old friend, true. But she could have told Harry > that the Order was keeping watch and couldn't let him know > more directly because the Ministry would just love to catch them > doing magic in front of Muggles. She could have told him that a > safe place was being prepared and that he'd be sent for once it > was ready. SSSusan: I agree, Pippin -- these comments from Mrs. Figg would've been wonderful. My remaining question about the situation is, "Why didn't SHE *press* him to come?" Surely she knew he thought of her as a batty old woman w/ cats who "babysat" him. If he turned down tea, couldn't she have *pressed* it a bit, with a hint that she had something important to tell him from DD or something? Again, I'm expecting more of the ADULTS in this book.... Pippin: > After the Arthur attack there's a problem. They don't want to let > Voldemort know how much they know, and Dumbledore has > already spotted him looking out through Harry's eyes. > Dumbledore can't be sure Voldemort won't be able to read other > people's minds through Harry's eyes, and only Snape can block > him. SSSusan: You're right about specific content and the Order's fear about Voldy being able to access it from Harry's mind. But what about a more *direct* -- if necessarily vague -- admonition from DD to Harry? Not *through* someone like Snape(!) or even Lupin, but directly from DD? Again, it could've been a letter. Something that spoke earnestly & seriously about how Harry needed to work at Occlumency -- IN SPITE OF his *understandable* belief that the visions were helpful. Couldn't DD & Snape have been in contact about how Occ. was going? If they had been, surely Snape would've complained about how Potter wasn't trying hard enough, didn't seem to really want to block the visions & dreams. Even with no report from Snape, DD knows about Harry's "saving people thing" and tendency to take everything upon himself. DD needed to be SURE that Harry understood that, contrary to common sense as it might seem, there was a *reason* he must try to block the visions. Even if DD couldn't tell Harry what that reason was, he could talk about its seriousness, talk about how dangerous it could be to Harry *and others* if he didn't. Don't you think Harry would have listened to that if the tone had been serious? if DD acknowledged that he understood Harry's tendency to believe the visions and to distrust Snape? I do. For me it's about expecting MORE from the adults. I'm not even talking about Harry's part, Harry's foul-ups, at this point -- of course there were some -- but just that if the ADULTS had cautiously, carefully, seriously approached him with this kind of (limited) information, things might have played out differently & less tragically. I know it's fiction and JKR wrote it the way she wanted to write it, but I'm getting back to the question which was raised by HunterGreen as to whether it was *believable* that so many adults would have failed Harry in this way. As she said, "the whole situation was horrifically mismanaged" and I agree with that assessment. Siriusly Snapey Susan From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 14 20:00:07 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 20:00:07 -0000 Subject: Themes in OotP (was Re: Angry Harry in HBP?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119891 > SSSusan: snip. I know it's fiction and JKR wrote it the way she wanted to write it, but I'm getting back to the question which was raised by HunterGreen as to whether it was *believable* that so many adults would have failed Harry in this way. As she said, "the whole situation was horrifically mismanaged" and I agree with that assessment. Alla: Great post, Susan. I absolutely agree that whole situation was horrifically mismanaged as Rebecca said, but I did find a way to rationalise it somehow. We have no problem understanding that Dumbledore can make mistakes, right? Well, to me the reason why so many adults failed Harry so badly is simply because they put too much trust in Dumbledore infallibility (is this even a word). You know, we may not agree with him personally, but since he is the only wizard Voldemort ever feared, we will do what he says and hope for the best kind of thing. Does it make sense? From rsteph1981 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 14 20:16:49 2004 From: rsteph1981 at yahoo.com (Rebecca Stephens) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 12:16:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Themes in OotP (was Re: Angry Harry in HBP?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041214201649.86726.qmail@web20023.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119892 --- dumbledore11214 wrote: > > > > SSSusan: > > snip. > > > I know it's fiction and JKR wrote it the way she > wanted to write it, > but I'm getting back to the question which was > raised by HunterGreen > as to whether it was *believable* that so many > adults would have > failed Harry in this way. As she said, "the whole > situation was > horrifically mismanaged" and I agree with that > assessment. I don't really have a problem with it. They could not tell Harry anything or aknowledge to him that anything was up for fear Voldemort would find out. Certainly some of these adults could have offered emotional support but I find it unlikely that he wold have accepted it. Also I find it likely they were trying to make Harry seem less important so that the DEs would not know how key he was. Also, they aren't his parents. Sirius had a responsibility to Harry. The others are (former) teachers and friends parents and the like. They had their own reason for keeping quiet (Molly trying to protect, even if misguided, is completely in character). Lastly, these people were members of the Order and had that responsibility too. Although Harry's emotional health is important, it does not outstrip the safety of the WW. They were keeping him safe as best they could and keeping it a secret from him to protect the rest of the world. Harry is not 9 years old. He should have the brains to realize that there are *reasons* for him being kept in the dark, especially by a number of people he's known and trusted for some time. If he wants to be involved in all this (well, he's involved whether he wants to be or not, but he wanted to be) then he should understand that he doesn't get to have it all his way. He should try to learn Occlumency and know that there was a reason he was being taught. Harry is very much in the mindset of "if I don't know then it doesn't count." The others are adults and well past that. You can bet that each of them knows there are things they are being kept in the dark about and knows there are reason for it even if they don't know those reasons. The facts remain simple to me. Telling Harry anything could let it get back to Voldemort and that was too great a risk, in Dumbledore's estimation. I may not agree with his thinking, but I understand it. Harry didn't want emotional support (though he needed it), he wanted information. Ron and Hermione tried talking to him, but he just kept blowing up at them whenever they tried to empathize or explain. Rebecca ===== http://wychlaran.tripod.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The all-new My Yahoo! - What will yours do? http://my.yahoo.com From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 14 20:23:22 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 20:23:22 -0000 Subject: Themes in OotP (was Re: Angry Harry in HBP?) In-Reply-To: <20041214201649.86726.qmail@web20023.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119893 Rebecca: > I don't really have a problem with it. They could not > tell Harry anything or aknowledge to him that anything > was up for fear Voldemort would find out. Alla: That I strongly disagree with. They could tell Harry many things during the summer prior to Arthur's attack and Dumbledore could have at least wrote a letter, as Susan said. Rebecca: Certainly some of these adults could have offered emotional support but I find it unlikely that he wold have accepted it. Also I find it likely they were trying to make Harry seem less important so that the DEs would not know how key he was. Alla: Again I disagree. I think Harry craved and badly needed emotional support AND information. You just don't leave a teen alone after Graveyeard nightmare, IMO. Rebecca: snip. Lastly, these people were members of the Order and had that responsibility too. Although Harry's emotional health is important, it does not outstrip the safety of the WW. They were keeping him safe as best they could and keeping it a secret from him to protect the rest of the world. Alla: Sure, cause is important, but if they expect Harry to take Voldemort out FOR THEM, I'd say they have A LOT of responsibility to at least try and support him. From gbannister10 at aol.com Tue Dec 14 20:28:53 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 20:28:53 -0000 Subject: Themes in OotP (was Re: Angry Harry in HBP?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119894 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "hickengruendler" wrote: Hickengruendler: > But Harry couldn't have known this. Well, maybe he could, if he had > realized who the Arabella Dumbledore was talking about at the end of > GoF really is. But on the other hand, he only knew her as Mrs Figg, > and since the last name isn't that uncommon in Britain, I don't think > he necessarily should have made the connection between Arabella Figg > and Mrs Figg. Geoff: Not sure I agree that Figg is not uncommon in the UK. My name is fairly uncommon - it is a North country name but in my local telephone directory which covers sizeable area, there are 13 Bannisters to 5 Figgs. And I don't recall a Figg in the several thousand pupils who passed through my classroom. From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Tue Dec 14 20:49:13 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 20:49:13 -0000 Subject: Adults "failing" Harry (was: Themes in OotP) In-Reply-To: <20041214201649.86726.qmail@web20023.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119895 SSSusan earlier: > > snip. > > I know it's fiction and JKR wrote it the way she > > wanted to write it, but I'm getting back to the question which was > > raised by HunterGreen as to whether it was *believable* that so > > manyadults would have failed Harry in this way. As she > > said, "the whole situation was horrifically mismanaged" and I > > agree with that assessment. Rebecca: > I don't really have a problem with it. They could not > tell Harry anything or aknowledge to him that anything > was up for fear Voldemort would find out. > > Also, they aren't his parents. Sirius had a > responsibility to Harry. The others are (former) > teachers and friends parents and the like. They had > their own reason for keeping quiet (Molly trying to > protect, even if misguided, is completely in > character). SSSusan: Sirius is the only "parent" Harry now has. Molly in her own words says she's as good as a parent to Harry. Their good reasons for keeping quiet were: 1) DD's orders and 2) their own fears and discomforts. I'm questioning these very things. Rebecca: > Lastly, these people were members of the Order and had > that responsibility too. Although Harry's emotional > health is important, it does not outstrip the safety > of the WW. They were keeping him safe as best they > could and keeping it a secret from him to protect the > rest of the world. > Harry didn't want emotional support (though he needed it), > he wanted information. SSSusan: Again, it's NOT really Harry's emotional health that I've been arguing here. His emotional health would be NICE to have addressed at some point, but I'm talking about information, too -- about his safety and preparedness and having a feeling of knowing what's going on & his role in things, knowing that there are people he can trust to believe him & believe in him, as well as to provide SOME information. I would say that the safety of the rest of the world is what's at risk in the decision *NOT* to tell him things! If Harry can't be convinced that he needs to do X or Y, then the wizarding world will have to live with the consequences of his actions/inactions. I just don't get why he could be told *nothing* without too much info getting back to Voldy. I just spent some time in the post that was snipped giving an example of exactly what I thought DD could have done to have helped Harry see why he needed to take Occlumency seriously, without having to give him any dangerous specifics that Voldy might've been able to access. For instance. DD knows, after the Arthur attack, that Voldy's now aware of the connection between him & Harry. DD suspects Voldy will try to USE this to *lure* Harry. Thus DD thinks it's *essential* that Harry learn to block the visions & dreams. He tells Snape to teach Harry and lets Snape explain what's up & why. DD himself makes no contact w/ Harry. I'm arguing that EVEN JUST having had DD contact Harry with the news about Occlumency & the what's up & why might've made Harry believe in Occlumency's importance and that he must work at it & trust Snape. DD doesn't have to say, "We know Voldy is going to lure you to the DoM." DD could have said, "We believe Voldy might be able to use this connection to *feed* you *false* images, Harry, and since you wouldn't know what's real and what's false, this could be REALLY dangerous to you & others." How would that be giving Voldy too much information? In fact, if Harry believed this from DD -- much more likely than when it comes from Snape -- he'd possibly have been able to master Occlumency, shutting out Voldy, which would've meant Voldy wouldn't get any info anyway! By and large I *like* DD, so I'm not trying to play the blame game here and say everything is his fault. I am trying to say that the adults in OotP didn't do a very good -- perhaps even a very believable -- job with Harry. There WAS more they could have done without having spilled *all* the beans. And the results might have been dramatically different. Rebecca: > Harry is not 9 years old. He should have the brains to > realize that there are *reasons* for him being kept in > the dark, especially by a number of people he's known > and trusted for some time. SSSusan: But with Occlumency, for instance, he's getting the info from Snape, whom he isn't willing to trust. For right or wrong, that's a fact, and it had a big impact on how Occlumency went. If *DD* or even Lupin or Sirius had told Harry all they could about Occlumency, such as I outlined above, Harry might've trusted the information. At this point Harry doubts DD's interest in him. If DD had reached out to him at this point with enough detail to convince Harry of the seriousness of the situation, it could've made all the difference. Siriusly Snapey Susan From gbannister10 at aol.com Tue Dec 14 20:51:22 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 20:51:22 -0000 Subject: McGonagall-ness (Re: Angry Harry in HBP?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119896 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "madlysarcastic" wrote: > > Alla wrote: > > > We discussed Mcgonagall recently and yes, I think she should have > > done MUCH more for Harry than telling him "to get a grip", BUT I do > > think that she was acting in character. > > > > > > Have you EVER seen her acting nice and motherly to Harry during the > > course of the series? She is fair, IMO but not kind. Maddy: > Ah, but you're forgetting that she gave Harry his Nimbus 2000 in PS/SS > and let him on the Quidditch team in his first year. And I'd say > that's acting pretty kind. And yes, it probably was largely due to the > fact that Harry showed great ability as a Seeker and she wanted to see > Gryffindor win the Cup, but I think she wouldn't have done that for > just anyone. > > No, I wouldn't ever describe McGonagall as "motherly", but that > doesn't detract from her ability to be nice and kind. > > While she is very strict (yet, as you said, fair) I've found there are > quite a few small instances where McGonagall shows a small amount of > affection (whether it be a joke or advice) or gives a fleeting smile. > She's not the type of person to be overly affectionate, or have > favourite students, but I think she does have a tiny soft spot for > Harry. I think she shows affection in very small, infrequent doses, > but that doesn't mean it's not there. Geoff: As I was reading through the various posts on this thread, my mind suddenly took me back to my own schooldays. McGonagall is very much one of the old school. A strict disciplinarian but who has a soft spot for the needs of her students. In my last three years at my grammar school in South London (Fifth Year, Lower Sixth and Upper Sixth), I had the same form teacher, who also taught me Maths. He was a rather dour Northcountryman (from Durham IIRC) but he knew how to teach the subject and he also had a very dry sense of humour, which matched mine and I found in him someone as a model in later years. He also had a soft spot, because on one occasion he surprised me greatly when, having found out I was a railfan, he gave me a couple of small books in his possession which described journeys on the main lines out of London and what you were passing; I kept these books for many years afterwards and was often thankful that I had come under the tutelage of this teacher. Again, when I first taught, I had a Headmaster who hailed from North Wales and was a small human volcano. He was strict on discipline and ran a very tight ship but he considered at base that he had a family of 400 boys. He was not afraid to admit if he made a mistake, he got to know every boy by name and would keep as far up to date as he could with their achievements. He was not distant, he was not sentimental but the lads almost worshipped the ground he walked on... I think Minerva McGonagall is another member of this class. Firm but fair. From darkmatter30 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 14 20:56:35 2004 From: darkmatter30 at yahoo.com (Richard) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 20:56:35 -0000 Subject: A comment on SHIPs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119897 Hickengruendler wrote: > In fact, the only interpretation I haven't read is that Luna is > clearly a Lesbian who will end up with Hermione, of course. But I'm > sure it's only a matter of time. ;-) OK, so I'll say it, just so we get it out of the way. Luna is clearly a lesbian (or at least bi-) who will end up with Hermione, or perhaps in a three-way relationship with Hermione and Ginny, particularly if Harry, Ron and Neville all die in the War. Well, personally, I don't believe it, but hey authors have done stranger things ... I just don't see all the gay and lesbian themes some of expounded upon. The girls in the main and secondary trios have all clearly shown interest in the other gender, as have all the boys in girls. My personal opinion is that Ron and Luna are "marked for death." There is canon support for both, but then we have canon support for the death of just about every last person of real interest thus far. but, if we do look at the math of it all, elimination of one pairing does tend to signficantly reduce the number of other pairings that are possible ... Not as much as a canon pairing would, mind you, but still significantly ... Consider n boys and n girls, with all the pairings possible. Well, there are n! (n factorial), if you completely ignore personalities, etc. Let's say we have 10 boys and 10 girls to pair off. You have a total of something like 3,628,800 possible pairings. If just one pair is impossible, lose 362,880 of those. Make just one canonical, and you take the number of possible pairing to 362,880. So, we've eliminated two SHIPs (Hr/D and L/N), and that really DOES reduce the options, ESPECIALLY when you start considering personality incompatibilities and likely deaths. In the end, though, JKR will tell HER tale, and we don't have a say. She knows what the pairings will be, and who will die and remain hermits. I simply hope that, as she has a clear pattern of trying to make important features realistic, she doesn't stick us with any SHIPs that don't make sense in Real-World psychological terms. darkmatter, who worries that those little girls really do think the cads they pine for have hidden hearts of gold. From meriaugust at yahoo.com Tue Dec 14 22:04:26 2004 From: meriaugust at yahoo.com (meriaugust) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 22:04:26 -0000 Subject: Prewett Brothers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119898 Jen: > Just off the top of my head, here are some *possible* plot points > and people who won't return in any significant way: > > 1) Luna's family, the Quibbler and all Luna's fantastic ideas. Meri: O I think these will be back. A little comic relief never hurt any story and with Fred and George out of the picture Luna and her crumple-horned snorckacks are just what the healer ordered. Also I think it is possible, like an earlier poster said, that the things Luna knows or believes to be true might just come in handy during a crisis situation. Maybe crumple-horned snorckaks have healing powers that can save one of the character's lives. Probably not, but who knows? > 2) Wormtail's silver hand (I hope this one has meaning for Wormtail paying off his life debt). Meri: I have personally not given this one much thought at all since GoF. Other posters have speculated that this hand will be what kills Lupin. But has anyone else wondered if maybe LV still has some control over the hand? Could Pettigrew be in a possition to kill Harry, want to stay his spell because of the life debt and then have LV force the hand to cast the spell? I wonder how/if that spell would bounce off Harry because of life debt protection? snip > 4) Ron's seer (?) abilities. Meri: I never bought that one myself. Ron's good for some things, he's brave and loyal and completely hilarious (well, in my opinion) but I don't think he's a seer. From what we've seen in the series so far prophecies and predictions come during trances when the seer seemingly looses control of their body. But that's not happened to Ron. snip > 7) Birth order of the Weasleys. Meri: What's this one refering to? Is it the mixup with Bill and Charlie's ages? I am pretty sure that the Weasleys were born when they appear to be born, if only because I think that time travelling conception is something a little too out there, closer to Douglas Adams than what Rowling is used to doing. > 8) Quidditch! Meri: I really hope Quidditch comes back big time. Harry needs something to keep him distracted and remind him that life isn't all insane wizards trying to kill him and dementors and death of loved ones. There's gotta be room in these stories for joy (and one of the things I love about OotP is that it has its share of laugh out loud moments, even in the depths of darkness) and Quidditch is what makes Harry the happiest. If DU hadn't taken it away from him fifth year then maybe Harry doesn't fly off the handle so often and is more willing to practice occlumency; he'd be more tired at night and perhaps less willing to have those nightmares. Meri - who would probably add Phineus Nigellus, the Creevey brothers, Professor Karkaroff, the Flying Ford Anglia, Aragog, the Riddle House and Ludo Bagman to this list - and also hopes that JKR does publish a complete set of her notes (as another poster suggested) From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Tue Dec 14 23:20:30 2004 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 23:20:30 -0000 Subject: Prewett Brothers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119899 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "meriaugust" wrote: > > Meri - who would probably add Phineus Nigellus, the Creevey > brothers, Professor Karkaroff, the Flying Ford Anglia, Aragog, the > Riddle House and Ludo Bagman to this list - and also hopes that JKR > does publish a complete set of her notes (as another poster > suggested) Hickengruendler: I can't speak for the rest, but Aragog and the Ford Anglia will definitely return. Click: http://www.quick-quote- quill.org/articles/1999/0999-barnesnoble-staff.htm >Will Aragog appear in any later books? >Yes. But I'm not telling you anymore than that! And in the same interview: >Will we ever hear from Mr. Weasley's car again? >Yes, you will hear from Mr. Weasley's car again, but yet again, I'm not telling you how. Hickengruendler, who thinks everything is leasing to a big battle in and around Hogwarts in book 7 and that will be the way we'll see them again From udderpd at yahoo.co.uk Tue Dec 14 23:37:24 2004 From: udderpd at yahoo.co.uk (udder_pen_dragon) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 23:37:24 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Another change on JKR's website In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041214233724.42517.qmail@web25304.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119900 Half way down the Welcome Notice on JKR's desk the wording has changed from "where I can announce that I have finished book six" to "where I can announce that I have finished book seven" Does this mean that she has finished book six? TTFN UdderPD 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 heos at virgilio.it Tue Dec 14 13:34:37 2004 From: heos at virgilio.it (chrusotoxos) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 13:34:37 -0000 Subject: Lucius betrayed? (WAS Re: JKR's cryptic answer: Who sent the Lestranges...) In-Reply-To: <20041213211420.0C4373975@mprdmxin.myway.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119901 > chrusotoxos: > >6) And this puzzles me: Lucius, well connected at the Ministry and > >very bright, must know that a prophecy would explode if it falls > >down, allowing everyone to hear what's inside it (and, two prophecies > >actually break while he's in the Department of Misteries). So the > >logical thing would be to hurt Potter in some way, the prophecy slips > >and the DE can hear > > Mari: > As well connected and smart as he is, he can't know everything. Another possibility is that LV did not want all of his DE to hear it. > > I agree that he is playing a more danerous game than Snape is. Snape has > the protection of Dumbledore, but Lucius has nothing. That part in the Department of Mysteries still doesn't convince me...even if Lucius didn't know beforehand that prophecies explode out loud, he would have known afterwrds, as two prophecies did just so while he was there. Maybe LV had given orders for them not to hear the prophecy, but all the same, when everything was lost, he could have shot it. This way they're just back when they started... And Lucius is mystery in himself...I'm thinking that he could be an anti-Snape, and this could explain why Voldemort didn't punish him and why Karkaroff didn't mention him as a very important supporter of LV. Maybe he is a very important supporter, but he's working as a spy from inside the Ministry, just as Snape is spying for Dumbledore from inside the DE. That's why in a way Snape respects him: they're similar, but opposite (this goes as far as their bodies...). They're fooling each other. Of course, if this is true, LV could not punish Lucius: it was his job to keep a low profile, after all. But maybe now LV doesn't need Lucius as a spy, because he's strong enough not to care about the Ministry. That's why he can afford to name Malfoy in front of 30 people and to send Malfoy to get the prophecy. Oh well, we should just wit and see, I guess. From imontero at iname.com Tue Dec 14 18:21:51 2004 From: imontero at iname.com (lunamk03) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 18:21:51 -0000 Subject: SHIP Calculus--JKR site spoiler In-Reply-To: <00d401c4e198$100bbda0$4c8b1a40@hppav> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119902 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Erika L." wrote: > darkmatter: > >I've always had a problem with the Ron/Hermione SHIP, even > >though it is clear that there is real chemistry there. The problem is > >one of experience. > > I have a similiar problem with the R/Hr SHIP, though I disagree with the idea that bickering/arguing necessarily equals chemistry. To me their disagreements are a sign that they have different values not to mention rather serious communication problems. > > Best, > Erika (Wolfraven) Luna: I agree that R/Hr bickering could be perceived as a communication problem or a manifestation of their supposed incompatibility. I myself perceive it as a product of the tension between them. Even JKR confirmed this tension, as she stated that Ron and Hermione were the couple with more potential (or tension in there) to engage in snogging activities and she also confirmed that something is ? going on ? between them. At the end, these are books that JKR is writing, if we discuss who would be more compatible with whom, we can find evidence to support as many couples as we can think of because the compatibility issue is a highly personal and subjective view of the books. We have to read what JKR has to say about it (in interviews) and see the facts that she is presenting to us: Fact1: Ron feels something or has something ? going on ? for Hermione (confirmed in canon and in JKR interviews). Fact2 : Harry is somehow aware of this situation (Harry ? got the point ? after the famous Ron/Hermione after ball fight, Harry found an arm of Viktor doll under his bed, Ron asks Harry what Hermione sees in Viktor, Harry sees Ron reactions every time Hermione mentions Viktor name, Harry saw Ron reaction after Hermione's good luck kiss. We know Harry can be slow when it comes down to emotions, but not THAT slow ) Fact3 : Hermione asked Ron to ask her first whenever they have another ball (the most direct shippy line in the books) When Hermione is telling Ron and Harty that Viktor invited her to spend summer vacations with him, she got red and she didn't meet Ron eyes (why would she do that?). Fact4 : Harry has no interest whatsoever on whom Hermione is dating, whom she fancies or not. In short, he doesn't consider Hermione (as of TOOP) as a possible L.I. JKR, when asked about H/H, usually states how good, very platonic friends they are and dismiss any romantic implication. When asked about R/H, she is affirmative. So, we can choose to go and look at the facts, or just draw our own interpretation of what JKR is telling us in her interview and in her books. Both choices are very valid, with the difference of a higher risk of disappointment at the end of the series with the later choice From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Tue Dec 14 22:39:41 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 14:39:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Muggle technology for communication? (Re: Jo's site) In-Reply-To: <20041214185521.51334.qmail@web52706.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041214223941.93942.qmail@web53108.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119903 > Juli said: > Even if a muggle born wizard-witch would bring a > cell > phone to Hogwarts it wouldn't work (look into JKR's > website under FAQ), so why would the Order Members > use > them to communicate since their leader (DD) is > usually > at Hogwarts? > > Griffin782002 answered: > > Well, this is well known. But if a wizard wanted to > use a cellphone in Hogwarts couldn't they operate by > magic? Like Colin's camera? > Juli again: Yes that may be right, but a camera is an item both used by the muggle and wizard world, so it works, the cell phone on the other hand is an strictly muggle device, remember Arthur can't even say Telephone (he says Phelytone or something like that)so I don't think it could work (I don't know a lot about electronics but I do know a cell phone is much more complicated than a camera). Even if it worked, do you think the average wizard will lower him/herself to that? I doubt it. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 250MB free storage. Do more. Manage less. http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250 From annettehamel at hotmail.com Tue Dec 14 20:26:28 2004 From: annettehamel at hotmail.com (Annette Hamel) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 20:26:28 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Hogwarts letters Re: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119904 Del wrote (regarding muggle-born wizards): By the way : I'm wondering what happens to them on a legal level in the Muggle World? After a while, their abscence from the MW must look suspicious, the administration must be starting to be concerned. How do they deal with that ? Annette now: I'm glad Del raised this issue. A question I have often pondered ... a child is required to attend school up to a certain age, either a state school or a private one. If the WW is "hidden", wouldn't there be a truancy issue? For example, Hermione Granger would have a school record somewhere, but after age 11 she would just disappear from the "muggle" school system, wouldn't she? I have a problem with the whole "secrecy" issue, actually. If a wizard "ambassador" goes to visit a muggle-born 11-year-old and his/her parents to explain the Hogwart's letter, and the parents refuse to let the child go ... do they modify the memories of all three? What about relatives? It seems to me that there would be many, many muggles who would know about the WW. Annette From macfotuk at yahoo.com Wed Dec 15 02:42:39 2004 From: macfotuk at yahoo.com (macfotuk at yahoo.com) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 02:42:39 -0000 Subject: Another change on JKR's website In-Reply-To: <20041214233724.42517.qmail@web25304.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119905 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, udder_pen_dragon wrote: > > Half way down the Welcome Notice on JKR's desk the wording has changed from "where I can announce that I have finished book six" to "where I can announce that I have finished book seven" > > Does this mean that she has finished book six? > > TTFN UdderPD Well spotted UdderPD! I'd given up reading that blurb after so many months. What with publishing three chapter titles and some other remark about having proof-read a ton of (21 IIRC) chapters plus 'writing and re-writing' it would seem she's certainly very busy right now. A comment elsewhere says that her third child is rapidly racing Harry's next adventure into the world, but doesn't say which 'next' adventure. She always said that 6 and 7 were so related that they'd be written one on top of the other and while a baby break will almost certainly delay the final showdown (book 7) the signs seem right for a July 2005 release of Half-Blood Prince. Or is that just wishful thinking? Maybe the announcement will be JKR's Xmas present to the world. That or something to brighten the dark winter months. Everyone says it'll be at least 6 months editing etc before an M/s from Jo will appear in print (to say nothing of the horrendous difficulties maintaining security and ensuring a supply of enough paper copies all on sale on the same day! - remarkable, admirable, MAGIC!). Rubs *own* hands tigether in glee (quote JKR) mac From macfotuk at yahoo.com Wed Dec 15 02:53:23 2004 From: macfotuk at yahoo.com (macfotuk at yahoo.com) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 02:53:23 -0000 Subject: Hogwarts letters Re: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119906 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Annette Hamel" wrote: > > Del wrote (regarding muggle-born wizards): > By the way : I'm wondering what happens to them on a legal level in > the Muggle World? After a while, their abscence from the MW must look > suspicious, the administration must be starting to be concerned. How > do they deal with that ? > > > Annette now: > > I'm glad Del raised this issue. A question I have often pondered ... a > child is required to attend school up to a certain age, either a state > school or a private one. If the WW is "hidden", wouldn't there be a truancy > issue? Am amazed at how few people know that home education is legal in UK and undertaken by parents of 1 in 100 kids for a huge variety of reasons. Being 'different' (and, usually stigmatised at school as a result - e.g. Asperger's or ADHD) is just one of these reasons. Bullyinging, religious differences etc are others. The authorities seem quite happy to get these 'difficult' and 'resource-intensive' cases off their books. So, education is compulsory (in the UK), but school is not. The authorities ARE supposed to check, but are remarkably (well, not really, given high workload, voluminous paperwork and extreme resource limitations) slow and infrequent in making such visits. From mrsbonsai at charter.net Wed Dec 15 03:25:36 2004 From: mrsbonsai at charter.net (jastrangfeld) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 03:25:36 -0000 Subject: Book 6 must be finished because Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119907 as someone on another site pointed out to me, that JK's site has reworded the intro letter . . . . Rewording now states: "This is where I can tell you the truth about rumours or news stories, where I can share the extra information I haven't put in the books, where I can give you hints and clues about what's going to happen to Harry next and where I can announce I've finished book seven... and no, that's not going to happen very soon." Um, it used to say books 6 and 7 :) Julie From imamommy at sbcglobal.net Wed Dec 15 04:36:50 2004 From: imamommy at sbcglobal.net (imamommy at sbcglobal.net) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 04:36:50 -0000 Subject: Muggle technology for communication? (Re: Jo's site) In-Reply-To: <20041214185521.51334.qmail@web52706.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119908 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sp. sot." wrote: --- javalorum wrote: > > > > > Just curious, at time of great difficulty and war, > > is it possible for > > wizards to use muggle technology? I mean, > > considering the other side > > may not expect the usage of cellphones and such, > > it's not likely > > they'll try to monitor it (it's hard to track the > > content of a call > > if it's well ciphered anyway). > > Juli said: > Even if a muggle born wizard-witch would bring a cell > phone to Hogwarts it wouldn't work (look into JKR's > website under FAQ), so why would the Order Members use > them to communicate since their leader (DD) is usually > at Hogwarts? > > Juli > > > > Griffin782002: > > Well, this is well known. But if a wizard wanted to use a cellphone in Hogwarts couldn't they operate by magic? Like Colin's camera? > > Griffin782002 imamommy: IMO, no, for the same reason that muggle "bugging' equipment wouldn't work. The camera worked off magic, but it was an entity unto itself. A cell phone has to be able to relay and receive signals between itself and a satellite. Also, consider the timing: cell-phones were a lot less common, and much bulkier, in 1995. And few, if any, would have had text-messaging. I hope that the Order has a more reliable, more magical form anyway. I am sure it is as fast as it needs to be. I would even dare hope for some form of telecommunication. imamommy From imamommy at sbcglobal.net Wed Dec 15 05:04:27 2004 From: imamommy at sbcglobal.net (imamommy at sbcglobal.net) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 05:04:27 -0000 Subject: Themes in OotP (was Re: Angry Harry in HBP?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119909 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > > SSSusan: > > snip. > > > I know it's fiction and JKR wrote it the way she wanted to write it, > but I'm getting back to the question which was raised by HunterGreen > as to whether it was *believable* that so many adults would have > failed Harry in this way. As she said, "the whole situation was > horrifically mismanaged" and I agree with that assessment. > > > > Alla: > > Great post, Susan. I absolutely agree that whole situation was > horrifically mismanaged as Rebecca said, but I did find a way to > rationalise it somehow. > > We have no problem understanding that Dumbledore can make mistakes, > right? Well, to me the reason why so many adults failed Harry so > badly is simply because they put too much trust in Dumbledore > infallibility (is this even a word). You know, we may not agree with > him personally, but since he is the only wizard Voldemort ever > feared, we will do what he says and hope for the best kind of thing. > Does it make sense? imamommy: The other justification I would offer is Harry's biased opinion on what was going on, as a literary device. Don't get me wrong, I agree that the adults in his life could have done much better. I totally agree that DD's mistakes set the stage for other adults to make mistakes. Mrs. Figg herself said that she was supposed to watch Harry, but not let him know he was being watched. I don't think she would have told him any more even if he had gone to tea. I think that most teenagers go through a time when they feel like the world is against them. I think a major theme of OoP is Harry finding out that the adults in his life are not infallible. His father (pensieve scene), Hagrid (Grawp), Sirius (dying), DD (mistakes to great to enumerate here). I think the adults needed to be written this way for us to feel a sense of Harry learning that grown ups make mistakes, that even those who love us don't always make the best decisions. We need to feel his abandonment, his frustration, at why his world is turned upside down. Is it believeable? For me yes. I accept that DD was in the middle of a huge string of screw ups. Lupin and Sirius didn't get much opportunity to talk to Harry, first because of Molly and then because of Umbridge's screening. For those who suggest DD should have written Harry about the snake dream, how would a letter have made it between Hogwarts and 12GP without Umbridge disovering it? He could have written after Harry returned to school, but then we've still got the problem of having things spelled out *in writing* (anyone remember when Neville lost the passwords third year?) Figg and McGonagall were following orders from DD, and they are very loyal. Snape is the link that would have been logical to help Harry, but he is exactly the wrong person for this instance. So Harry feels abandoned, helpless, and uninformed. He and his friends do their best to figure it out on their own. Hmm...for those who like to see sexual symbols in HP, this reminds me of a boy discovering his sexuality. He isn't getting his information from parents or responsible adults, so he and his friends do their best to come up with answers to his questions. They don't entirely get it right, do they? Please allow me to quote Dickens: Ignorance and Want "'Forgive me if I am not justified in what I ask,' said Scrooge, looking intently at the Spirit's robe,' but I see something strange, and not belonging to yourself, protruding from your skirts. Is it a foot or a claw.' 'It might be a claw, for the flesh there is upon it,' was the Spirit's sorrowful reply. 'Look here.' >From the foldings of its robe, it brought two children; wretched, abject, frightful, hideous, miserable. They knelt down at its feet, and clung upon the outside of its garment. 'Oh, Man. look here. Look, look, down here.' exclaimed the Ghost. They were a boy and a girl. Yellow, meagre, ragged, scowling, wolfish; but prostrate, too, in their humility. Where graceful youth should have filled their features out, and touched them with its freshest tints, a stale and shrivelled hand, like that of age, had pinched, and twisted them, and pulled them into shreds. Where angels might have sat enthroned, devils lurked, and glared out menacing. No change, no degradation, no perversion of humanity, in any grade, through all the mysteries of wonderful creation, has monsters half so horrible and dread. Scrooge started back, appalled. Having them shown to him in this way, he tried to say they were fine children, but the words choked themselves, rather than be parties to a lie of such enormous magnitude. 'Spirit. are they yours.' Scrooge could say no more. 'They are Man's,' said the Spirit, looking down upon them. 'And they cling to me, appealing from their fathers. This boy is Ignorance. This girl is Want. Beware them both, and all of their degree, but most of all beware this boy, for on his brow I see that written which is Doom, unless the writing be erased. Deny it.' cried the Spirit, stretching out its hand towards the city. 'Slander those who tell it ye. Admit it for your factious purposes, and make it worse. And abide the end.' 'Have they no refuge or resource.' cried Scrooge. 'Are there no prisons.' said the Spirit, turning on him for the last time with his own words. 'Are there no workhouses.'" - A Christmas Carol, Stave 3: The Second of the Three Spirits Ignorance is a very dangerous thing. imamommy From ignatia_wildfire at yahoo.com Wed Dec 15 04:14:51 2004 From: ignatia_wildfire at yahoo.com (Ignatia Wildfire) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 04:14:51 -0000 Subject: SHIP Calculus--JKR site spoiler In-Reply-To: <00d401c4e198$100bbda0$4c8b1a40@hppav> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119910 > darkmatter: > >In the H/R case, I see each as respecting significant parts of each > >other, but also having little or no respect ... even a certain > >contempt ... for other facets. For example, Ron sure seems to think Hermione is well off her rocker when it comes to Elf rights, and > >Hermione definitely sees Ron as, at least at times, incredibly > >insensitive. Erika -> > I also see this as an obstacle towards a real relationship. - Wildfire -: Darkmatter, I think you are going about it the wrong way. You are trying to find *logical* reasons for Ron and Hermione to pair up, or *logical* reasons for their bickering. As Mr. Spock could tell you - humans are rarely logical nor do they behave in a logical way. And emotions *never* followed a logical path. The chemistry is there. They bicker because they care for one another. As it has been mentioned, Harry doesn't care who H is going out with. It's not that he doesn't care for her - I bet he would get worried if she started dating Crab - but Ron is showing clear signs of jealousy. I am not advocating that R and H SHOULD pair up, but there is enough evidence that things are going this way. They are complementary, to each other, and as support to Harry. I hate to think that Ron will be killed! Somehow I see him more like Samwise is to Frodo. I think it is more likely that Harry will perish (the prophecy is vague enough), and Ron will survive to tell the tale - married to Hermione, maybe, nursing baby Harry... From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 15 05:50:48 2004 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 05:50:48 -0000 Subject: Adults "failing" Harry (was: Themes in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119911 > SSSusan: >[...]I'm getting back to the question which was raised by HunterGreen as to whether it was *believable* that so many adults would have failed Harry in this way.< Betsy: I think that that Harry's status as an orphan actually does make the failure on the part of the adults in his life *very* believable in this kind of situation. None of the adults, no matter how much they cared for Harry, had the authority to step in and make very sure that he was okay. >SSSusan: > Sirius is the only "parent" Harry now has. Molly in her own words says she's as good as a parent to Harry. Their good reasons for keeping quiet were: 1) DD's orders and 2) their own fears and discomforts. I'm questioning these very things.< Betsy: But "good as" is not the same thing as being an actual parent. And to have Sirius and Molly as the stand in parents, when both of them have spent very little time (quality or otherwise) with Harry, serves to point out just how parentless Harry is. A few weeks over a couple of summers and a few abbreviated conversations between moments of high adrenalin do not a parental connection make. Molly was probably the most persistent in trying to check on Harry's emotional health, but he hid from her when she tried, and I think, because he is not technically her child, she didn't feel like she could hunt him down and confront him as she would have felt the right to do with one of her own children. (A good comparison would be her attempts to reach Percy. If Harry had refused contact with Molly, I doubt she would have shown up on his doorstep, sweater in hand, like she did with Percy IIRC correctly.) If you notice, Molly has never really raised her voice to Harry. She lets her own kids have it, but Harry is a guest. Much loved, but a guest none the less. Lupin arguably knows Harry better than the other adults at 12 Grimmauld Place having taught him for a year, but he'd be highly aware of stepping on Sirius' toes. And Sirius, bless him, is a many- issued man, and not really up for this kind of parenting. I don't think Sirius had a clue, and I'm not sure that he'd have listened to any advice. Certainly not from Molly, and probably not even from Lupin. So Harry, at a time when he needs parents the most, is heavily affected by the lack of said parents. > SSSusan: > Again, it's NOT really Harry's emotional health that I've been arguing here. His emotional health would be NICE to have addressed at some point, but I'm talking about information, too -- about his safety and preparedness and having a feeling of knowing what's going on & his role in things, knowing that there are people he can trust to believe him & believe in him, as well as to provide SOME information.< Betsy: Ah, and this is something that can be laid only at Dumbledore's doorstep. He's the leader of this particular band of brothers and he decides who knows what. And he obviously, and mistakenly, decided in the beginning to keep Harry as much in the dark as he could. It was an old man's mistake, as he tells Harry at the end of OotP. And his motives were very similar to Molly's attempts to keep all the children in the dark. This is a war, and the more you know, the more you're involved; the more you're involved, the more danger you're in. Better to keep the children safely tucked away where the darkness cannot touch them. I think Dumbledore thought Harry would be soothed by Ron and Hermione's letters. Children don't need to know exactly how an adult chases away the darkness; they're just happy to know the problem is being solved. What both Dumbledore and Molly failed to see was that the "children" really weren't children anymore. They'd already been exposed to the darkness. And Harry especially had a right to a place at the table. What Dumbledore failed to remember is that you can't keep someone from growing up. And to old man Dumbledore, Harry seemed so awfully young. > SSSusan: > I would say that the safety of the rest of the world is what's at risk in the decision *NOT* to tell him things! If Harry can't be convinced that he needs to do X or Y, then the wizarding world will have to live with the consequences of his actions/inactions.< Betsy: And when Dumbledore felt that Harry was of an age to affect the Wizarding world, he planned on letting Harry in on things. But at this point in the game, Dumbledore's plan was to keep Harry off the board. So no actions or inactions to worry about. > SSSusan: >I just spent some time in the post that was snipped giving an example of exactly what I thought DD could have done to have helped Harry see why he needed to take Occlumency seriously, without having to give him any dangerous specifics that Voldy might've been able to access. [snip] >[...]DD thinks it's *essential* that Harry learn to block the visions & dreams. He tells Snape to teach Harry and lets Snape explain what's up & why. DD himself makes no contact w/ Harry. I'm arguing that EVEN JUST having had DD contact Harry with the news about Occlumency & the what's up & why might've made Harry believe in Occlumency's importance and that he must work at it & trust Snape.< Betsy: This was another miscalculation of Dumbledore's, though I think a more understandable one. Snape is a teacher, a damn good one as per his NEWT successes, and he assigns Snape a teaching job. Why on earth would Dumbledore have to explain to the pupil that he should listen to his teacher and take his lesson seriously? And why would Dumbledore need to hang over the shoulder of a teacher he trusts and respects? Dumbledore does underestimate the bad blood between Harry and Snape. Though honestly, in a war situation it is odd that Snape is unable to handle a rebellious teenager. (But I think that discussion is a whole other post. *g*) > SSSusan: > By and large I *like* DD, so I'm not trying to play the blame game > here and say everything is his fault. I am trying to say that the > adults in OotP didn't do a very good -- perhaps even a very > believable -- job with Harry. There WAS more they could have done > without having spilled *all* the beans. And the results might have > been dramatically different. Betsy: Hopefully I've shown why I think the actions of the adults around Harry were believable, maybe even a little bit understandable. Of course, Dumbledore was wrong. He underestimated Harry's maturity and his ability to handle joining the war against Voldemort. But I can see why Dumbledore made this mistake. He loves Harry. I imagine it would be hard to recognize exactly when the child you love is ready to pick up a sword and walk onto the battle field. And I imagine you'd try and delay that time for a long as you possibly could. So I don't think this was a ham-handed attempt on Jo's part to unnecessarily complicate OotP, but actually a natural outgrowth on the part of the characters. --Betsy, who's up way past her bedtime and so probably waxed far too poetic. From spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com Wed Dec 15 07:49:11 2004 From: spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com (dungrollin) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 07:49:11 -0000 Subject: Adults "failing" Harry (was: Themes in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119912 SSSusan: Sirius is the only "parent" Harry now has. Molly in her own words says she's as good as a parent to Harry. Their good reasons for keeping quiet were: 1) DD's orders and 2) their own fears and discomforts. I'm questioning these very things. I just don't get why he could be told *nothing* without too much info getting back to Voldy. I just spent some time in the post that was snipped giving an example of exactly what I thought DD could have done to have helped Harry see why he needed to take Occlumency seriously, without having to give him any dangerous specifics that Voldy might've been able to access. For instance. DD knows, after the Arthur attack, that Voldy's now aware of the connection between him & Harry. DD suspects Voldy will try to USE this to *lure* Harry. Thus DD thinks it's *essential* that Harry learn to block the visions & dreams. He tells Snape to teach Harry and lets Snape explain what's up & why. DD himself makes no contact w/ Harry. I'm arguing that EVEN JUST having had DD contact Harry with the news about Occlumency & the what's up & why might've made Harry believe in Occlumency's importance and that he must work at it & trust Snape. DD doesn't have to say, "We know Voldy is going to lure you to the DoM." DD could have said, "We believe Voldy might be able to use this connection to *feed* you *false* images, Harry, and since you wouldn't know what's real and what's false, this could be REALLY dangerous to you & others." How would that be giving Voldy too much information? In fact, if Harry believed this from DD -- much more likely than when it comes from Snape -- he'd possibly have been able to master Occlumency, shutting out Voldy, which would've meant Voldy wouldn't get any info anyway! Dungrollin: But there was another reason for DD being so distant. He thought that if Voldy ever realised that DD and Harry were closer than a headmaster and a student, Voldy would try to use Harry to attack DD. And even at the end of OotP, when DD is apologising for being an old fool, he maintains, *specifically*, that he was right about this, whatever else he was wrong about. Presumably Voldy would have been trying to get DD to hurt or kill Harry in self-defense. It's surely significant that throughout OotP, the only two times DD and Harry make eye-contact, Harry feels the Voldy urge to attack him. In only two instances of a few seconds each, in the *whole* school year, Voldy is behind Harry's eyes, ready and waiting for his chance. Most would agree that DD knows more than he's letting on; if he suspected the connection between Voldy and Harry right after GH, I reckon he's got a much better understanding of it by now. What does he know? More than we do, certainly. Is there some Harry pre-programming going on? Perhaps the something of Voldy that resides in Harry's head is obeying other instincts, now that Voldy's got his body back. Though it's interesting that what Harry feels is a snake-like urge to bite DD, rather than the urge to reach for his wand, and that the only other bit of Voldy that we know is in Harry is the ability to speak Parseltongue. ? There's some connection there, Slytherin, Voldemort, Harry, snakes and parselmouths. Why is part of Voldy's *mind* snake-like? (When he possessed Harry, he was " locked in the coils of a creature with red eyes" ? again, sounds like a serpentoid. Voldy doesn't seem to have left anything *human* in Harry's head.) What did Voldy do to ensure he didn't die at GH? How much does DD know, and how much does it affect his decisions with respect to Harry? A lot, I think. Anyhow, my point is that DD is the one who knows about the connection through the scar (and more than he's told Harry and the others), DD is the one whom everybody trusts, and DD is the one giving orders *which get followed*. I agree, to a certain extent, SSSusan, the reasons for not telling Harry *anything at all* do seem odd, and DD does admit that he was wrong, but I'm fairly confident that he had better reasons for being wrong than we know about. I hope so, anyway, otherwise, like you, I'll be a bit miffed. All in all, I'm trying to say that I'm waiting for book 7 before I say that OotP was crap, though I am tempted to agree with you now. Dungrollin From patientx3 at aol.com Wed Dec 15 09:57:40 2004 From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 09:57:40 -0000 Subject: Adults "failing" Harry (was: Themes in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119913 Rebecca wrote: > Lastly, these people were members of the Order and had > that responsibility too. Although Harry's emotional > health is important, it does not outstrip the safety > of the WW. They were keeping him safe as best they > could and keeping it a secret from him to protect the > rest of the world. > Harry didn't want emotional support (though he needed it), > he wanted information. SSSusan replied: >>Again, it's NOT really Harry's emotional health that I've been arguing here. His emotional health would be NICE to have addressed at some point, but I'm talking about information, too -- about his safety and preparedness and having a feeling of knowing what's going on & his role in things, knowing that there are people he can trust to believe him & believe in him, as well as to provide SOME information.<< Betsy: >>Ah, and this is something that can be laid only at Dumbledore's doorstep. He's the leader of this particular band of brothers and he decides who knows what. And he obviously, and mistakenly, decided in the beginning to keep Harry as much in the dark as he could. It was an old man's mistake, as he tells Harry at the end of OotP. And his motives were very similar to Molly's attempts to keep all the children in the dark. This is a war, and the more you know, the more you're involved; the more you're involved, the more danger you're in. Better to keep the children safely tucked away where the darkness cannot touch them.<< HunterGreen (i would have had a lot more to say if SSSusan hadn't said it first): But the darkness is going to touch Harry no matter what. That is a fact. There is nothing that anyone can do to avoid that. Voldemort wants to lure Harry to the DoM, and keeping him in the dark about it is not going to save him. *TELLING* him about it is going to save him. Besides, it goes back to something I mentioned upthread, if there were so gung-ho about treating Harry like a child, why did they give him no support? A child can not be counted on to make correct decisions in a crisis (*ahem* running off to "rescue Sirius"), and if he were treated like an adult here he would have known the vision was most likely false. My point is that someone (it doesn't have to be Dumbledore) should have told Harry "If you have another vision contact ____" Harry doesn't trust Snape, Dumbledore *knows* this. But that wasn't even the reason why Harry didn't go to him, he simply didn't think of it. If Snape had approached Harry after McGonagal had been taken to St. Mungos and told Harry (or passed on a letter from DD, or written himself, which seems more in character), that said if you have a vision please alert Professor Snape at once and he take care of it. The problem was that all the people in the order seemed to assume that Harry would either suceed at occulmency, or be able to discount a vision put in his head by one of the most evil and powerful wizards ever as just a vision when he previously had a TRUE vision which saved someone's life. That's just a lot to swallow. How many adults who have NEVER had a vision would be able to ignore one of a loved one about to be murdered? When Harry had the dream he didn't know what to do and that is something that could have been easily been avoided without having to give Harry any "secret" information. Harry should be of great concern to the order, especially when they know Voldemort and the DEs are targeting him. Betsy: >>Snape is a teacher, a damn good one as per his NEWT successes, and he assigns Snape a teaching job. Why on earth would Dumbledore have to explain to the pupil that he should listen to his teacher and take his lesson seriously? And why would Dumbledore need to hang over the shoulder of a teacher he trusts and respects?<< HunterGreen: Even if he were getting taught occulmency from Lupin (for example) Harry would need to understand WHY it was so important. Convincing Harry of its importance without giving anything away is already hard enough, why have one of Harry's enemies explain it to him? And there's no way Dumbledore was unaware of Harry's mistrust of Snape. Personally, I think occulmency would have never worked no matter who taught it or who explained the situation to Harry since its not meant for blocking people out of your dreams. But it didn't have a chance unless Harry really cared about it, you can't FORCE something to care about something, which is what all the adults around him were doing ("Harry, you must learn occulmency." "Why?" "YOU MUST!!!" -- that doesn't accomplish anything). He thought the connection with Voldemort was helpful, and he had a good reason for thinking so. Just telling him that Voldemort might use to to do something bad is not enough. Who would that convince? In any case, hopefully OotP was the last book of adults treating Harry like a little kid, and pretending that he has nothing to do with Voldemort. If we have to go back to people keeping things from him and if Mrs. Weasley mentions him not being "of age", there's going to be a lot of patience tested. Its been five books, its time for Harry to be recognized for what he is. From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Wed Dec 15 11:35:16 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 11:35:16 -0000 Subject: Book 6 must be finished because In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119914 > as someone on another site pointed out to me, that JK's site has > reworded the intro letter . . . . > > Rewording now states: > > "This is where I can tell you the truth about rumours or news stories, where I can share the extra information I haven't put in the books, where I can give you hints and clues about what's going to happen to Harry next and where I can announce I've finished book seven... and no, that's not going to happen very soon." > > > Um, it used to say books 6 and 7 :) > > Julie Valky: Assuming your recollection is absolutely accurate, and I do, of course, then the new wording 100% implies that an announcement that book six (HBP) is finished is no longer "not going to happen very soon".... or contrariwise the announcement is imminent!!!! And WILL appear on the Website. That of course is not the release of the book, *sigh*, nor does it inequivocally mean that book six is finished right now. OTOH JKR couldn't safely say that she is about to announce if there were any possibility of a delay....... So....... YAY YAY YAY, and a distinct increase in my Christmas Cheer!!! Well Done and Congratulations JKR, and may the sun shine for you as you write book seven!!! From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Wed Dec 15 11:59:19 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 11:59:19 -0000 Subject: That Quidditch is(n't) boring (WAS Re: Prewett Brothers (plot points)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119915 Hickengruendler wrote : I think Harry will play Quidditch again, but I hope not, since the Quidditch sections always bore me. > Valky: Surely you're exaggerating? The Quidditch matches themselves might be often too familiar, but have you forgotten the Rogue Bludger, The Dementors, Weasley is our King, and Harry's very first butterflies over Cho? Far from boring, I get a lot out of the Quidditch games, as a reader. Long shall they live!!! lol ;D From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Dec 15 12:32:52 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 12:32:52 -0000 Subject: Adults "failing" Harry (was: Themes in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119916 SSSusan: > > I would say that the safety of the rest of the world is what's > > at risk in the decision *NOT* to tell him things! If Harry > > can't be convinced that he needs to do X or Y, then the > > wizarding world will have to live with the consequences of his > > actions/inactions. Betsy: > And when Dumbledore felt that Harry was of an age to affect the > Wizarding world, he planned on letting Harry in on things. But at > this point in the game, Dumbledore's plan was to keep Harry off > the board. So no actions or inactions to worry about. SSSusan: "So no actions or inactions to worry about." If that's the case, then I guess I'd say DD really screwed this one up. That remark might have held true for most kids, but hasn't DD figured Harry out YET when it comes to this? "Someone's after the SS? I'll go stop him!" "Someone's taken Ginny? I'll go get her!" I mean, this kid is nothing if not "action" when the pressure's on or when he perceives something needs to be done. I think DD should have expected Harry to have continued this tendency, esp. after the attack on Mr. Weasley and his role in it. Harry think he needs to DO things, and he'll do them on the sly if he thinks he has to. DD should have been aware of that. SSSusan: > >I just spent some time in the post that was snipped giving an > > example of exactly what I thought DD could have done to have > > helped Harry see why he needed to take Occlumency seriously, > > without having to give him any dangerous specifics that Voldy > > might've been able to access. > [snip] > >[...]DD thinks it's *essential* that Harry learn to block the > > visions & dreams. He tells Snape to teach Harry and lets Snape > > explain what's up & why. DD himself makes no contact w/ Harry. > > I'm arguing that EVEN JUST having had DD contact Harry with the > > news about Occlumency & the what's up & why might've made Harry > > believe in Occlumency's importance and that he must work at it & > > trust Snape. Betsy: > This was another miscalculation of Dumbledore's, though I think a > more understandable one. Snape is a teacher, a damn good one as > per his NEWT successes, and he assigns Snape a teaching job. Why > on earth would Dumbledore have to explain to the pupil that he > should listen to his teacher and take his lesson seriously? SSSusan: Um... because it's SNAPE and HARRY, that's why. Snape is *not* a damn good teacher when it comes to Harry. And if DD isn't aware of the animosity between them, then that's shocking. McGonagall certainly is aware of it. ["Yes, Potter, *Potions*."] I'm not talking about what "should" happen in an ideal world with Random Student X and Random Teacher Y. I'm talking about the world JKR has shown us for 4 1/2 years, with Specific Student Harry and Specific Teacher Snape. It's different than theorizing in the abstract -- or should be. If it's wartime and you know each General's strengths & weaknesses, don't you plan strategy accordingly? Betsy: > And why would Dumbledore need to hang over the shoulder of a > teacher he trusts and respects? SSSusan: Well, DD later admitted it was a mistake to use Snape, so there must have been reason for that admission. Again, it's not that one "should" have to do this in every situation; it's that DD should have recognized it might be necessary in *this* situation. Betsy: > Hopefully I've shown why I think the actions of the adults around > Harry were believable, maybe even a little bit understandable. Of > course, Dumbledore was wrong. SSSusan: I snipped your earlier section on the other adults, and I do understand what you're saying about their behaviors being understandable. You pointed out, for instance, that Sirius and Molly *aren't* really Harry's parents. My only argument remaining about that would be that if they are going to say that they're "all the parent" he has or that they're "good as a parent" that they really should step up and act like it. Sirius, I think, tried to do this at the start but didn't keep it up consistently. Molly probably felt that she *was* acting like a parent by doing what she is wont to do with her own children -- (over?)protecting them. So, I agree with you that some of these people's actions were understandable. I wish they'd looked at whether they were actually *helpful* to Harry, though. And DD... well, the more I think about this, the more I guess I really do think he goofed up. Siriusly Snapey Susan From willsonkmom at msn.com Wed Dec 15 13:00:06 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 13:00:06 -0000 Subject: Adults "failing" Harry (was: Themes in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119917 > SSSusan: snip So,I agree with you that some of these people's actions were > understandable. I wish they'd looked at whether they were actually *helpful* to Harry, though. And DD... well, the more I think about this, the more I guess I really do think he goofed up. Potioncat(taking two steps from the characters and looking at the books: Of course the adults let Harry down. They've done in every book. If they didn't the books wouldn't be about Harry Potter, they would be about Dumbledore or about the different members of the Order. I think JKR has written very stong adult characters...we all seem to have strong opinions about them...but she still has to have them fail in some way. She's done a nice job of creating flaws, misunderstandings, ill will between characters so that in some believable way these powerful witches and wizards drop the ball and Harry has to run with it. How many insipid children's books, wait, make that insipid books for children...have I read that have the goofiest, most inept adults you've ever seen! And of course they all end with episode 32 coming very soon to a bookstore near you... But JKR's adults are capable..except for certain moments or for certain reasons, or within certain limits. Lupin wanted to help, but he can't bring himself to tell secrets from his school days, and he forgets his potion, putting the students at risk. Snape wants to defeat LV, but he can't overcome his animosity for Harry. A little trust would have helped in OoP!! Molly wants to help, but she sees him as a child (I can't blame her, I wouldn't be eager for my 15 year old to take on DEs) We can go on and on... And come to think of it, how many times have we adults in the RW failed some kid? Hopefully not to the dangerous extent as in these books, but to some level? And how many times has it turned out OK anyway? Erm...does anyone have a good closing paragraph to put here? Potioncat From Vivamus at TaprootTech.com Wed Dec 15 13:31:20 2004 From: Vivamus at TaprootTech.com (Vivamus) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 08:31:20 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Book 6 must be finished because In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200412150831381.SM01080@devbox> No: HPFGUIDX 119918 > Valky: > Assuming your recollection is absolutely accurate, and I do, of > course, then the new wording 100% implies that an announcement that > book six (HBP) is finished is no longer "not going to happen very > soon".... or contrariwise the announcement is imminent!!!! And WILL > appear on the Website. > > That of course is not the release of the book, *sigh*, nor does it > inequivocally mean that book six is finished right now. OTOH JKR > couldn't safely say that she is about to announce if there were any > possibility of a delay....... So....... > > YAY YAY YAY, and a distinct increase in my Christmas Cheer!!! > > Well Done and Congratulations JKR, and may the sun shine for you as > you write book seven!!! Amen to that! And the drum roll begins . . . From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Dec 15 13:35:31 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 13:35:31 -0000 Subject: Adults "failing" Harry (was: Themes in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119919 Dungrollin: > But there was another reason for DD being so distant. He thought > that if Voldy ever realised that DD and Harry were closer than a > headmaster and a student, Voldy would try to use Harry to attack > DD. And even at the end of OotP, when DD is apologising for being > an old fool, he maintains, *specifically*, that he was right about > this, whatever else he was wrong about. Presumably Voldy would > have been trying to get DD to hurt or kill Harry in self-defense. > > It's surely significant that throughout OotP, the only two times DD > and Harry make eye-contact, Harry feels the Voldy urge to attack > him. > > Is there some Harry pre-programming going on? Perhaps the > something of Voldy that resides in Harry's head is obeying other > instincts, now that Voldy's got his body back. > > Anyhow, my point is that DD is the one who knows about the > connection through the scar (and more than he's told Harry and the > others), DD is the one whom everybody trusts, and DD is the one > giving orders *which get followed*. I agree, to a certain extent, > SSSusan, the reasons for not telling Harry *anything at all* do > seem odd, and DD does admit that he was wrong, but I'm fairly > confident that he had better reasons for being wrong than we know > about. I hope so, anyway, otherwise, like you, I'll be a bit > miffed. All in all, I'm trying to say that I'm waiting for book 7 > before I say that OotP was crap, though I am tempted to agree with > you now. SSSusan: Oh my goodness! I hope I didn't give the impression that I think OotP was crap. I enjoyed the book very much. In fact I think I mentioned in one of my posts yesterday that I'm quite easily entertained, and I was *definitely* entertained by OotP and much less bothered by some of its flaws than other posters. That being said, I was disappointed in the adults around Harry. Betsy, Imamommy and others have helped show me that some of their behaviors were actually fairly understandable [a point I realize now I made myself once yesterday, so I've been talking in circles a bit],and that JKR may have had them "fail" Harry so much precisely because he was learning that adults *are* fallible. So what I'm left with is an annoyance with DD that's greater than I realized it was before. I do understand your point about DD knowing more than we do, esp. about the connection, and I hope you're right that we'll discover enough more about this in 6 or 7 that we'll say a big, "Ohhhh!" BUT. I still think that, even if DD was convinced Voldy would try to use the connection to get Harry to turn on him [DD] if he suspected their relationship was close, and thus he felt the need to avoid being together much and looking into Harry's eyes, I still think he could have communicated via some other method. You know, one of those Mission: Impossible self-destructing tapes or a letter he instructs Harry to burn immediately. Harry has always pleased DD with his strength and courage and bravery, with his ability to handle things many adult wizards could not have handled. I guess I think for all Harry was annoyed with DD in OotP, if DD had made that effort to really explain how vital it was that Harry trust him, that he work on Occlumency so Voldy couldn't feed him any lies, Harry would have worked to please DD again. You know? Just *enough* detail and personal touch that Harry'd say, "DD trusts me enough to tell me some stuff; he *hasn't* abandoned me; I'm going to work even though *Professor* Snape is a prick." [Gotta get that line in somewhere.] And if Harry *had* been so willing, he might have succeeded at Occlumency and therefore shut down Voldy's intrusions. Now, did DD *not* do this with Harry for a good reason? I'm sure he thought so at the time. It was out of love, out of wanting to protect him, just like Molly's mollycoddling. But DD always seems to *know* more than others, and I would've thought he could have seen how his tack could really backfire.... Siriusly Snapey Susan From yutu75es at yahoo.es Wed Dec 15 13:36:01 2004 From: yutu75es at yahoo.es (fridwulfa) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 14:36:01 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Another change on JKR's website References: Message-ID: <008801c4e2ab$2a7fa570$2101a8c0@portatil> No: HPFGUIDX 119920 AMong the many christamsy-themed things in the site, there's an advent calender (extra stuff) and I'd swear there's a new window open every day. So maybe this advent calender marks not only christmas but the announcement, as a countdown, I don't know. I, too, think this change in the text means that she's finished the book and that we'll have a release date announced pretty soon. Otherwise it doesn't make sense. OTHO, Why update the site with the "no news" bit where she clearly states that she's still writing? Unless she finished the book, I don't know, yesterday. Cheers, Fridwulfa ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Wednesday, December 15, 2004 3:42 AM Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Another change on JKR's website > > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, udder_pen_dragon > wrote: >> >> Half way down the Welcome Notice on JKR's desk the wording has > changed from "where I can announce that I have finished book six" > to "where I can announce that I have finished book seven" >> >> Does this mean that she has finished book six? >> >> TTFN UdderPD > > Well spotted UdderPD! > > I'd given up reading that blurb after so many months. What with > publishing three chapter titles and some other remark about having > proof-read a ton of (21 IIRC) chapters plus 'writing and re-writing' > it would seem she's certainly very busy right now. A comment > elsewhere says that her third child is rapidly racing Harry's next > adventure into the world, but doesn't say which 'next' adventure. > She always said that 6 and 7 were so related that they'd be written > one on top of the other and while a baby break will almost certainly > delay the final showdown (book 7) the signs seem right for a July > 2005 release of Half-Blood Prince. Or is that just wishful thinking? > > Maybe the announcement will be JKR's Xmas present to the world. That > or something to brighten the dark winter months. Everyone says it'll > be at least 6 months editing etc before an M/s from Jo will appear > in print (to say nothing of the horrendous difficulties maintaining > security and ensuring a supply of enough paper copies all on sale on > the same day! - remarkable, admirable, MAGIC!). > > Rubs *own* hands tigether in glee (quote JKR) > > mac > > > > > > > > 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 > > > > > > > From Vivamus at TaprootTech.com Wed Dec 15 14:03:02 2004 From: Vivamus at TaprootTech.com (Vivamus) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 09:03:02 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Another change on JKR's website In-Reply-To: <008801c4e2ab$2a7fa570$2101a8c0@portatil> Message-ID: <200412150903766.SM01080@devbox> No: HPFGUIDX 119921 > fridwulfa: > AMong the many christamsy-themed things in the site, there's > an advent calender (extra stuff) and I'd swear there's a new > window open every day. So maybe this advent calender marks > not only christmas but the announcement, as a countdown, I > don't know. I, too, think this change in the text means that > she's finished the book and that we'll have a release date > announced pretty soon. Otherwise it doesn't make sense. OTHO, > Why update the site with the "no news" bit where she clearly > states that she's still writing? Unless she finished the > book, I don't know, yesterday. > Cheers, > Fridwulfa Vivamus: Given all the hassles she has experienced in the past about finishing previous books, I would not be at all surprised if there were not some kind of decision made NOT to announce the book as finished until it went to a certain milestone in the editing/publishing process. So she hasn't made any announcement at all, and there is nothing to hassle her about. Her eagle-eyed fans, however, immediately pick up on the most subtle of clues, and come running faster than cats to the sound of a can opener. I *love* the idea of the calendar as a countdown, though. JKR does show a considerable appreciation for her fans, doesn't she? I appreciate *that*. I think she has found a way to let us know without being trampled to death by reporters. Rah, rah, JKR! I do hope the manuscript is now in the hands of others, so you can relax a bit and think about other things (life, children, etc.) I also hope you manage to find some privacy from the news media, until you are ready for a public announcement. Vivamus, whose boggart would be a bellowing herd of reporters with cameras and microphones From alexpie at aol.com Wed Dec 15 14:49:43 2004 From: alexpie at aol.com (alexpie at aol.com) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 09:49:43 EST Subject: Muggle communications Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119922 Hope I've snipped properly! Griffin782002: > > Well, this is well known. But if a wizard wanted to use a cellphone in Hogwarts couldn't they operate by magic? Like Colin's camera? Ah, but a camera can be purely a mechanical device. A good old SLR requires neither batteries nor computers chips. A cellphone requires both, which is why I think that the right sort of camera could work in WW, but cellphones would not. Ba [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From gbannister10 at aol.com Wed Dec 15 14:58:15 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 14:58:15 -0000 Subject: Prewett Brothers (and other possible insignificant plot-points) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119923 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "hickengruendler" wrote: Hickengruendler: > > 8) Quidditch! > > I'm not sure what you mean by this. I think Harry will play Quidditch > again, but I hope not, since the Quidditch sections always bore me. Geoff: Not like Quidditch.... not like Quidditch????? Come along, sir, this is totally un-British... It's... it's... it's just not cricket! :-) From lea_petra at yahoo.com Wed Dec 15 13:05:52 2004 From: lea_petra at yahoo.com (Mari Lea) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 05:05:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Hogwarts letters Re: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041215130552.3991.qmail@web60001.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119924 > Annette now: > > I'm glad Del raised this issue. A question I have > often pondered ... a > child is required to attend school up to a certain > age, either a state > school or a private one. If the WW is "hidden", > wouldn't there be a truancy > issue? For example, Hermione Granger would have a > school record somewhere, > but after age 11 she would just disappear from the > "muggle" school system, > wouldn't she? Mari Very simple solution. The parents only have to say they are homeschooling and file the paperwork with the school system. I'm not sure about England, but in America it could be as simple as printing up a curriculum and presenting it to the school board. This way the student is legally recieving an education and Hogworts is still hidden. Of course Hogwarts might also present themselves as another private school to a board of education. ===== "I thought you said we were done doing things the stupid way." --Puss-in-Boots Shrek 2 From spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com Wed Dec 15 16:49:58 2004 From: spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com (dungrollin) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 16:49:58 -0000 Subject: Adults "failing" Harry (was: Themes in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119925 SSSusan: Oh my goodness! I hope I didn't give the impression that I think OotP was crap. Dungrollin: Sorry, bad choice of word there... I didn't think it was crap, either. SSSusan: So what I'm left with is an annoyance with DD that's greater than I realized it was before. I do understand your point about DD knowing more than we do, esp. about the connection, and I hope you're right that we'll discover enough more about this in 6 or 7 that we'll say a big, "Ohhhh!" BUT. I still think that, even if DD was convinced Voldy would try to use the connection to get Harry to turn on him [DD] if he suspected their relationship was close, and thus he felt the need to avoid being together much and looking into Harry's eyes, I still think he could have communicated via some other method. You know, one of those Mission: Impossible self-destructing tapes or a letter he instructs Harry to burn immediately. Dungrollin: There's something about DD that was causing either the scar connection or the bit of Voldy that's in Harry's head to act up. And who's to say that reading a letter from DD might not have triggered something similar? I know it's an odd idea, but since we don't know how the scar connection works from Voldy's point of view, it is a possibility. SSSusan: Harry has always pleased DD with his strength and courage and bravery, with his ability to handle things many adult wizards could not have handled. I guess I think for all Harry was annoyed with DD in OotP, if DD had made that effort to really explain how vital it was that Harry trust him, that he work on Occlumency so Voldy couldn't feed him any lies, Harry would have worked to please DD again. You know? Just *enough* detail and personal touch that Harry'd say, "DD trusts me enough to tell me some stuff; he *hasn't* abandoned me; I'm going to work even though *Professor* Snape is a prick." [Gotta get that line in somewhere.] And if Harry *had* been so willing, he might have succeeded at Occlumency and therefore shut down Voldy's intrusions. Dungrollin: I agree with you here, that Harry may have tried harder with the Occlumency if DD had explained why it was important. But I'm not certain that DD had a choice. (I don't know that I actually believe this argument, I'm just trying to find another way of looking at it.) SSSusan: Now, did DD *not* do this with Harry for a good reason? I'm sure he thought so at the time. It was out of love, out of wanting to protect him, just like Molly's mollycoddling. But DD always seems to *know* more than others, and I would've thought he could have seen how his tack could really backfire.... Dungrollin: Ideally, DD should have told Harry about the prophecy at the end of GoF, right after the graveyard scene, but he put it off. Harry had been through too much already, later, later... Presumably at some point after that, DD learned something or figured something out that made him nervous of having too much contact with Harry, and so he was *unable* to tell him about the prophecy ? and nobody else (at least IMO) knew the contents, they only knew it was something Voldy wanted. (Still don't understand why Harry didn't feel the snake inside him in DD's office at the end of OotP, though.) But, to be honest, would a letter from DD in January, saying `Harry, it's really really really important that you learn Occlumency' have made any difference? He'd already been told that it was important, and that DD thought it was important. What *would* have made a difference would be Harry having known that Voldy wanted to trick him into going to the DoM; and to know that, he'd have had to have known about the prophecy. And if his curiosity wasn't to get the better of him again, he'd have had to know the *contents* of the prophecy, not just of its existence, or he'd have gone running off to the DoM to find out what it was about. And, quite apart from it having to be secret and everything, it's really not the sort of thing you could put in a letter, is it? Hmmm. I'm not sure it's convincing. What do you think? From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Dec 15 17:09:21 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 17:09:21 -0000 Subject: Adults "failing" Harry (was: Themes in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119926 Dungrollin: > There's something about DD that was causing either the scar > connection or the bit of Voldy that's in Harry's head to act > up. And who's to say that reading a letter from DD might not > have triggered something similar? I know it's an odd idea, but > since we don't know how the scar connection works from Voldy's > point of view, it is a possibility. SSSusan: No, no, I don't think it's odd. It would be something which would at least make *sense* of some of this if we find it to be true later. Dungrollin: > Ideally, DD should have told Harry about the prophecy at the end of > GoF, right after the graveyard scene, but he put it off. Harry had > been through too much already, later, later... SSSusan: Agreed. Dungrollin: > But, to be honest, would a letter from DD in January, saying > `Harry, it's really really really important that you learn > Occlumency' have made any difference? He'd already been told > that it was important, and that DD thought it was important. What > *would* have made a difference would be Harry having known that > Voldy wanted to trick him into going to the DoM; and to know that, > he'd have had to have known about the prophecy. And if his > curiosity wasn't to get the better of him again, he'd have had to > know the *contents* of the prophecy, not just of its existence, or > he'd have gone running off to the DoM to find out what it was about. > > And, quite apart from it having to be secret and everything, it's > really not the sort of thing you could put in a letter, is it? > Hmmm. I'm not sure it's convincing. What do you think? SSSusan: Frankly, I DO think hearing it *directly* from DD rather than through someone else might well have made a difference to Harry, yes. And that's partly because I'm proposing that the communication from DD would have had to have included NOT JUST that it's "really really really important," but, yes, also something specific about how Voldy might have the capability of feeding him not just actual images but *false* ones to trick him. If I were Harry, I'd think that kind of specific [but-not-too-specific for The Order!] information would have scared me into believing DD. But maybe I'm wrong. You've got a point about Harry's curiosity after all.... Ack, 'tis all moot, isn't it? Being all in the "what if" category anyway. But I'm still annoyed with DD! ;-) Siriusly Snapey Susan From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 15 19:08:23 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 19:08:23 -0000 Subject: Is Dumbledore still useful? Was:Re: Adults "failing" Harry (was: Themes in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119927 SSSusan: snip. Um... because it's SNAPE and HARRY, that's why. Snape is *not* a damn good teacher when it comes to Harry. Alla: Long round of applauds, Susan. :o) SSSusan: And if DD isn't aware of the animosity between them, then that's shocking. McGonagall certainly is aware of it. ["Yes, Potter, *Potions*."] I'm not talking about what "should" happen in an ideal world with Random Student X and Random Teacher Y. I'm talking about the world JKR has shown us for 4 1/2 years, with Specific Student Harry and Specific Teacher Snape. It's different than theorizing in the abstract -- or should be. If it's wartime and you know each General's strengths & weaknesses, don't you plan strategy accordingly? Alla: Well, complete agreement with this part of your post too, of course. :o) I have a question to ask though. I don't find it shocking anymore that Dumbledore made so many mistakes. Good intentions, whatever, as I said many times I find his behaviour of keeping harry in the dark to be incredibly foolish, BUT do you think that Dumbledore has no use as a general and leader anymore? Do you think that someone else will be better candidate to lead the Order? I frankly come close to thinking exactly that and that is why I contrary to many posters' opinion think that it is possible that Dumbledore will survive the end of the series to see that once again he interepreted the prophecy incorrectly. I don't know. Could you convince me that Dumbledore is still capable of being good general and good headmaster at the same time and if not who will be the better one, in your opinion? From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Wed Dec 15 19:22:22 2004 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 19:22:22 -0000 Subject: Prewett Brothers (and other possible insignificant plot-points) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119928 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "hickengruendler" > wrote: > > Hickengruendler: > > > 8) Quidditch! > > > > I'm not sure what you mean by this. I think Harry will play > Quidditch > > again, but I hope not, since the Quidditch sections always bore me. > > Geoff: > > Not like Quidditch.... not like Quidditch????? > > Come along, sir, this is totally un-British... > > It's... it's... it's just not cricket! > > :-) Hickengruendler: It's not that I dislike sports. If I were a member of the wizzarding community, I probably were a Quidditch fan. But the problem with reading about the games is, that once I know how the game ended, the section bores me, which is why I mostly skip all the Quidditch parts during re-reading. A sports event can be exciting to watch, but if you have to watch the repetition of the event it becomes boring very soon. :-) I do like JKR's invention of Quidditch, however and especially her parody of a big muggle sports event during the Quidditch Worldcup. From willsonkmom at msn.com Wed Dec 15 19:23:26 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 19:23:26 -0000 Subject: Is Dumbledore still useful? Was:Re: Adults "failing" Harry (was: Themes in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119929 >>Alla wrote: I don't know. Could you convince me that Dumbledore is still capable of being good general and good headmaster at the same time and if not who will be the better one, in your opinion? Potioncat: Did anyone ever say he was? Other than Hagrid, that expert on education, saying Dumbledore was the best Headmaster Hogwarts ever had. There certainly isn't any chain of command set up in the Order. (Unless of course Moody said, "Forget Snape, he doesn't give the orders, come along, Black.") There isn't any inkling that anyone is being groomed for the role, but then Harry wouldn't have reason to know about it. And we don't know some of the Order members at all. McGonagall seems like next in line for Headmistress...but I don't think she really is. She's still young. (Boy do I like saying that!) and we know that Headmasters/Headmistresses don't always come from within Hogwarts. (Headmistress Derwent) You have a very good question and obvioulsy, I don't have any sort of answer so I'll close now. Potioncat From steve51445 at adelphia.net Wed Dec 15 19:35:37 2004 From: steve51445 at adelphia.net (Steve) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 14:35:37 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Hogwarts letters Re: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: <20041215130552.3991.qmail@web60001.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041215193528.ILJD19344.mta13.adelphia.net@steveupstairs> No: HPFGUIDX 119930 >Mari > >Of course Hogwarts might also present themselves as >another private school to a board of education. Steve here: This is the same as what I was thinking. The muggle PM knows about the WW, so maybe others in the government do too. When the new first years send their replies back to Hogwarts, they could take that list and send it to the government. I've always had the feeling that the MW deals with the WW the way the government deals with aliens. If there are aliens (witches and wizards) then the government wouldn't tell us because we couldn't handle it. Steve Who used to listen to Art Bell on the radio while working 3rd shift at a gas station, not much else on at 3am. -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.296 / Virus Database: 265.5.3 - Release Date: 12/14/2004 From fmaneely at bellsouth.net Wed Dec 15 13:09:57 2004 From: fmaneely at bellsouth.net (fhmaneely) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 13:09:57 -0000 Subject: Another change on JKR's website In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119931 > UdderPD wrote: > > Half way down the Welcome Notice on JKR's desk the wording has > changed from "where I can announce that I have finished book six" > > to "where I can announce that I have finished book seven" > > > > Does this mean that she has finished book six? > mac : > Well spotted UdderPD! > > I'd given up reading that blurb after so many months. > the signs seem right for a July 2005 release of Half-Blood > Prince. Or is that just wishful thinking? > snip IMO, it's her subtle way of letting avid fans know she has finished. Who else would pick up on it or really care. I have been hoping that a real announcement would be on Christmas day but I am pretty sappy! Fran From clevinohio at yahoo.com Wed Dec 15 18:27:29 2004 From: clevinohio at yahoo.com (clev) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 18:27:29 -0000 Subject: Hermione and Grawp Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119932 I think that Grawp will somehow save Hermione's life and die in book 6. Does anyone else think that is a possibility? "clev" From yutu75es at yahoo.es Wed Dec 15 19:59:05 2004 From: yutu75es at yahoo.es (fridwulfa hagrid) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 20:59:05 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Another change on JKR's website References: <200412150903766.SM01080@devbox> Message-ID: <008501c4e2e0$8a4a66e0$8000a8c0@casa> No: HPFGUIDX 119933 > Vivamus: > Given all the hassles she has experienced in the past about finishing > previous books, I would not be at all surprised if there were not some > kind > of decision made NOT to announce the book as finished until it went to a > certain milestone in the editing/publishing process. So she hasn't made > any > announcement at all, and there is nothing to hassle her about. Me (Fridwulfa): I'm sure there won't be an announcement until the publishing house or houses have set a date for the release, and I'm sure that's not going to happen the day after the book is finished, there are too many things to be considered, that's why this change in the website has surprised me so much. Maybe she has already finished the book, hence the change in the website, and all we have to do now is wait for the publishers to do their job and come with a date for the release. I don't think we'll know anything for sure 'till then and, much as it pains me, I don't think that'll be before january. But I might be wrong, of course. Cheers, Fridwulfa > > > 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 > > > > > > > From siskiou at vcem.com Wed Dec 15 20:08:12 2004 From: siskiou at vcem.com (Susanne) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 12:08:12 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Hermione and Grawp In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <442181012.20041215120812@vcem.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119934 Hi, Wednesday, December 15, 2004, 10:27:29 AM, clevinohio at yahoo.com wrote: > I think that Grawp will somehow save Hermione's life and die in book > 6. Does anyone else think that is a possibility? Yes. I just hope it won't play out like the King Kong movie ;) -- Best regards, Susanne mailto:siskiou at vcem.com From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Dec 15 20:09:03 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 20:09:03 -0000 Subject: Is Dumbledore still useful? Was:Re: Adults "failing" Harry (was: Themes in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119935 SSSusan: > > Um... because it's SNAPE and HARRY, that's why. Snape is *not* a > > damn good teacher when it comes to Harry. Alla: > Long round of applauds, Susan. :o) SSSusan: Thanks, Alla. I feared I worded that a bit too strongly, but 'tis how I feel.... Alla: > I have a question to ask though. I don't find it shocking anymore > that Dumbledore made so many mistakes. Good intentions, whatever, > as I said many times I find his behaviour of keeping harry in the > dark to be incredibly foolish, BUT do you think that Dumbledore has > no use as a general and leader anymore? Do you think that someone > else will be better candidate to lead the Order? SSSusan: Sure, I think he could still lead. As long as "a foolish old man" is still capable of learning and changing [unlike a 37'ish young fool -- whoops! different thread], then I think there is hope he can lead. If Harry was spending OotP discovering that adults are fallible, then I think DD was spending OotP discovering that he, in particular, is fallible and that he MUST begin to treat Harry as an adult and full member of The Order now. If he can do that, and if the connection between Harry & Voldy has been altered now [??] such that Harry isn't in the same kind of danger he was in in OotP from it, then I think DD & Harry can pull that off. Alla: > I frankly come close to thinking exactly that and that is why I > contrary to many posters' opinion think that it is possible that > Dumbledore will survive the end of the series to see that once > again he interepreted the prophecy incorrectly. SSSusan: An interesting take, Alla. I still think DD's toast, but you could be right. If you're right, though, what would JKR's message to us be in that? That DD is an old fool yet again? I can't quite imagine her wanting to do that. But if there is some way that someone in the Order can determine that he is wrong about the prophecy in time to use that information, I suppose I could see it happening. But not if it's just to show, *again*, how DD is fallible. I'm positive there are many posters here who've thought a LOT more about this potential scenario and could comment. Alla: > I don't know. Could you convince me that Dumbledore is still > capable of being good general and good headmaster at the same time > and if not who will be the better one, in your opinion? SSSusan: Who better? I've no idea! I've heard many people speculate that Snape would take over The Order if DD died, but I can't see that -- at least not without his full story coming out so's people could trust him. Assuming Lupin's not ESE!, and even as much as I like him, he's still not forceful leadership material, imo. McGonagall has been DD's trusted Deputy Headmistress for awhile now, and she seems quite capable in that role, but we're not even all in agreement that she's even *in* The Order, let alone in on all the secrets or competent to head it up. Arthur? Definite possibility. Mundungus? No way. Moody? Not sure. Is he too skittish & almost overcautious? Bill? Not believable, imho. Too young & inexperienced. The others we just really don't know much about. And while presumably there are many other Order members "off-screen," we sure don't see that many more -- Arabella Figg, Kingsley S., Tonks, and a handful of others. How could we know their leadership capabilities? Oh--hey, I know. A recovered Alice & Frank Longbottom leading the way? Maybe! Siriusly Snapey Susan From spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com Wed Dec 15 20:30:40 2004 From: spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com (dungrollin) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 20:30:40 -0000 Subject: Adults "failing" Harry (was: Themes in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119936 > SSSusan: > Frankly, I DO think hearing it *directly* from DD rather than > through someone else might well have made a difference to Harry, > yes. And that's partly because I'm proposing that the > communication from DD would have had to have included NOT JUST > that it's "really really really important," but, yes, also > something specific about how Voldy might have the capability of > feeding him not just actual images but *false* ones to trick him. > If I were Harry, I'd think that kind of specific [but-not-too- > specific for The Order!] information would have scared me into > believing DD. But maybe I'm wrong. You've got a point about > Harry's curiosity after all.... Dungrollin: Just remembered something in 'The Centaur and the Sneak' just after DD knocks out Fudge and the other chaps from the ministry, and before he disappears from his office with Fawkes : "Listen to me, Harry," He said urgently. "You must study Occlumency as hard as you can, do you understand me? Do everything Professor Snape tells you and practise it particularly every night before sleeping so that you can close your mind to bad dreams - you will understand why soon enough, but you must promise me -" The man called Dawlish was stirring. Dumbeldore seized harry's wrist. "Remember - close your mind -" Didn't make much difference to Harry's attitude, did it? From annettehamel at hotmail.com Wed Dec 15 19:59:14 2004 From: annettehamel at hotmail.com (Annette Hamel) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 19:59:14 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Hogwarts letters Re: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119937 > Annette: > A question I have often pondered ... a child is required to > attend school up to a certain age, either a state school or > a private one. If the WW is "hidden", wouldn't there be a > truancy issue? Mac wrote: < So, education is compulsory (in the UK), but school is not. The authorities ARE supposed to check, but are remarkably (well, not really, given high workload, voluminous paperwork and extreme resource limitations) slow and infrequent in making such visits.>> Annette again: Homeschooling is also legal in the U.S., but is supervised by the state school system - parents have to file reports with the local school that the child would have been attending - so there would still be a record of the child. The child must be in school up till a certain age, and the record of the child would rest either with the state school or with the private school, if that's where they attend. I was not ignorant of homeschooling, I was including those kids in the "state school" group. Even if the authorities are slow and infrequent about checking, I can't imagine that the entire population of Hogwart's would go unnoticed decade after decade. I also assume that the majority of the muggle-borns attended regular school prior to Hogwart's (and, as you state, only 1% are homeschooled). That was my point anyway ;) From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Dec 15 20:42:07 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 20:42:07 -0000 Subject: Adults "failing" Harry (was: Themes in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119938 SSSusan: > > Frankly, I DO think hearing it *directly* from DD rather than > > through someone else might well have made a difference to Harry, > > yes. And that's partly because I'm proposing that the > > communication from DD would have had to have included NOT JUST > > that it's "really really really important," but, yes, also > > something specific about how Voldy might have the capability of > > feeding him not just actual images but *false* ones to trick > > him. If I were Harry, I'd think that kind of specific [but-not- > > too-specific for The Order!] information would have scared me > > into believing DD. But maybe I'm wrong. You've got a point > > about Harry's curiosity after all.... Dungrollin: > Just remembered something in 'The Centaur and the Sneak' just after > DD knocks out Fudge and the other chaps from the ministry, and > before he disappears from his office with Fawkes : > > "Listen to me, Harry," He said urgently. "You must study > Occlumency as hard as you can, do you understand me? Do everything > Professor Snape tells you and practise it particularly every night > before sleeping so that you can close your mind to bad dreams - you > will understand why soon enough, but you must promise me -" > > The man called Dawlish was stirring. Dumbeldore seized harry's > wrist. > "Remember - close your mind -" > > Didn't make much difference to Harry's attitude, did it? SSSusan: OHMYGOD!! You're right, Dung; I'd forgotten. Bummer. :-( So there goes my theory out the window -- with the exception of the part where I think DD should have told Harry that Voldy could potentially actually *feed him lies and false images*. So I guess I can still blame him for that bit and hang onto my "it would've made a difference" notion by the merest wisp of a thread? Otherwise, I guess I would have to fault... Harry?? Sh*t, that'll please Kneasy no end, won't it? Not that he's opposed to blaming DD for things, but those blasted teenagers are always screwing things up, thinking they know more than they do, right, Kneasy? Or do we just blame "life"? Thanks for pointing out the glaring whoops. Siriusly Snapey Susan From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Wed Dec 15 21:11:55 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (Barry Arrowsmith) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 21:11:55 +0000 Subject: I don't like him much Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119939 There's recently been a clutch of threads expressing concern over Harry, worrying about his emotions both past and future and about the failings of the adults in the books for daring to be out of step with the disobedient, lying little scrote. Young Potter is the eponymous hero and the viewpoint we get from the books is his. And not by any stretch of the imagination can that viewpoint be considered as unbiased. If Harry doesn't like something, then it must obviously be wrong; if somebody disagrees with Harry, then they are wrong. Rubbish. Harry is the one that's usually wrong - with unerring and boring predictability. He'd never admit it, of course; he'll try and justify his actions, splattering blame on everyone else within shouting distance. The annoying thing is, DD goes along with it, even placing blame where none could reasonably be laid - just to salve Harry's feelings. Bloody silly; it's storing up trouble for the future. One of the many definitions of adulthood is being willing to accept responsibility for one's own actions. OK, he's not an adult yet, though some posters seem to think he should be regarded as such, even though he has never shown any sign of acting like an adult. But the teenage years are when the pattern for the future adult is generally set. And young Potter has received zero guidance in the art of growing up. Everything is impulse and emotions. Fairly predictable at 16; the worrying thing is that there's no hint of any maturity that may develop and be his saving grace in the future. All I see is another Sirius in the making. The only people who have placed any meaningful restrictions on him at all are the ones he hates. And there's an arguable case for stating that the reason he hates them is because they restrict him. It's a very childlike attitude. Unlikeable too. We all know folks that act like this - are they popular? No. Do they make good friends? No. Wouldn't you just love to see them get their come-uppance? Ooh, yes! What DD feared is coming to pass - Harry is starting to believe his own publicity. Being Harry Potter is sufficient justification in his eyes for doing, thinking, almost anything. If things turn out well, the plaudits rain down, when it's "50 points to Gryffindor!" (even though what happened was usually a combination of luck and outside influences) his self-regard inflates another notch. Despite DD's fears and his attempts to prevent them coming to fruition, young Potter is regarded as something special in the WW - and he knows it. What hasn't sunk in yet is the price he's eventually going to have to pay. He's considered as special for a reason - he lived when he should have died; and he's going to have to do it again, only this time without the protective spells that saved him before. It'll be interesting to see if he can cope with the concept of going looking for Voldy rather than, as up to now, falling over him and doing his damnedest to get out from under. He'll probably manage it, unless JKR decides to wipe him out, the all-too-common reward for heroes in the sagas (after all, what's the use of an ex-hero?). But unless he shows some marked changes I can't see myself ever liking him as a character. Kneasy From willsonkmom at msn.com Wed Dec 15 21:12:32 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 21:12:32 -0000 Subject: Adults "failing" Harry (was: Themes in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119940 > Dungrollin: > > Just remembered something in 'The Centaur and the Sneak' just after > > DD knocks out Fudge and the other chaps from the ministry, and > > before he disappears from his office with Fawkes : > > > > "Listen to me, Harry," He said urgently. "You must study > > Occlumency as hard as you can, do you understand me? Do everything > > Professor Snape tells you and practise it particularly every night > > before sleeping so that you can close your mind to bad dreams - you > > will understand why soon enough, but you must promise me -" > > > > The man called Dawlish was stirring. Dumbeldore seized harry's > > wrist. > > "Remember - close your mind -" > > > > Didn't make much difference to Harry's attitude, did it? > > > SSSusan: snip> > Otherwise, I guess I would have to fault... Harry?? Sh*t, that'll > please Kneasy no end, won't it? Not that he's opposed to blaming DD for things, but those blasted teenagers are always screwing things up, thinking they know more than they do, right, Kneasy? Or do we just blame "life"? > Potioncat: Personally, the way my household is going, I'm set to blame the teenagers too! BTW, does the quote above indicate that Snape was teaching Occlumency according to the accepted method? Sorry, I had to ask. From willsonkmom at msn.com Wed Dec 15 21:23:24 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 21:23:24 -0000 Subject: I don't like him much In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119942 Kneasy wrote: > One of the many definitions of adulthood is being willing to accept > responsibility for one's own actions. OK, he's not an adult yet, > though some posters seem to think he should be regarded as such, even though he has never shown any sign of acting like an adult. Potioncat: You are dead right here. Molly is blasted for treating him like a child. Yet hardly anyone thinks he's should be expected to demonstrate maturity around Snape. Harry is a teenager and he acts just like one! (And the one he acts like lives in my house!) >Kneasy: > He'll probably manage it, unless JKR decides to wipe him out, the > all-too-common reward for heroes in the sagas (after all, what's the use of an ex-hero?). But unless he shows some marked changes I can't see myself ever liking him as a character. Potioncat: That must make it difficult to read the books! But he is a teenager. They are adorable one minute and pains in the...in the...in the elbow the next. I expect he'll turn out OK Potioncat, signging off to go hug her teenager. From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Wed Dec 15 21:26:37 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 21:26:37 -0000 Subject: Adults "failing" Harry (was: Themes in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119943 Dungrollin: > Just remembered something in 'The Centaur and the Sneak' just after > DD knocks out Fudge and the other chaps from the ministry, and > before he disappears from his office with Fawkes : > > "Listen to me, Harry," He said urgently. "You must study > Occlumency as hard as you can, do you understand me? Do everything > Professor Snape tells you and practise it particularly every night > before sleeping so that you can close your mind to bad dreams - you > will understand why soon enough, but you must promise me -" > > The man called Dawlish was stirring. Dumbeldore seized harry's > wrist. > "Remember - close your mind -" > > Didn't make much difference to Harry's attitude, did it? SSSusan: OHMYGOD!! You're right, Dung; I'd forgotten. Bummer. :-( So there goes my theory out the window -- with the exception of the part where I think DD should have told Harry that Voldy could potentially actually *feed him lies and false images*. So I guess I can still blame him for that bit and hang onto my "it would've made a difference" notion by the merest wisp of a thread? Otherwise, I guess I would have to fault... Harry?? Neri: I don't think you should admit defeat so fast, SSSusan :-) What Dungrollin forgot to add is that in response to this urgent request, DD gets from Harry one of those snake urges, and DD tells us later that he did notice it. So DD had a very clear indication that he is losing the battle on Harry's mind, and still he hasn't done anything about it, and left Harry alone. Regardless of Harry's fault, I think this passage is actually the strongest indication of DD's failings. This is not about being nice to Harry; this is about winning or losing the damn war. And I might add that DD knew that, while Harry had no reason to think that this is about something more than his own security. Neri From dolis5657 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 15 21:35:51 2004 From: dolis5657 at yahoo.com (dcgmck) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 21:35:51 -0000 Subject: Who Better as Headmaster? Was: Is Dumbledore still useful? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119944 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > [snip] > Alla: > > I don't know. Could you convince me that Dumbledore is still ccapable of being good general and good headmaster at the same time and if not who will be the better one, in your opinion? > > SSSusan: > Who better? I've no idea! > > I've heard many people speculate that Snape would take over The Order if DD died, but I can't see that -- at least not without his full story coming out so's people could trust him. > > Assuming Lupin's not ESE!, and even as much as I like him, he's still not forceful leadership material, imo. > > McGonagall has been DD's trusted Deputy Headmistress for awhile now, and she seems quite capable in that role, but we're not even all in agreement that she's even *in* The Order, let alone in on all the secrets or competent to head it up. Arthur? Definite possibility. Mundungus? No way. Moody? Not sure. Is he too skittish & almost overcautious? Bill? Not believable, imho. Too young & inexperienced. The others we just really don't know much about. And while presumably there are many other Order members "off-screen," we sure don't see that many more -- Arabella Figg, Kingsley S., Tonks, and a handful of others. How could we know their leadership capabilities? Oh--hey, I know. A recovered Alice & Frank Longbottom leading the way? Maybe! Siriusly Snapey Susan dcgmck: JKR likes to make little of big changes or surprises to come. That makes seemingly minor characters plausible future all-stars, so to speak. Of your aforementioned list, I'd like to point out that Kingsley demonstrated great presence of mind, ingenuity, and willingness to do the necessary in DD's office when Fudge and Umbridge thought they had finally gotten DD where they wanted him. Kingsley is thus demonstrably physically impressive, has that cool, deep voice that commands attention, and has demonstrated creative initiative without the attendant paranoia that hampers Moody's candidacy for leadership. Most important, he seems to be young enough to be worth some significant mileage yet to come, in contrast to McGonagall, who seems to be passing her prime, as indicated by Madame Pomfrey's outraged comments about her age when MM was shot down, (also in OotP). From alexpie at aol.com Wed Dec 15 21:45:20 2004 From: alexpie at aol.com (barbarahanson) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 21:45:20 -0000 Subject: I don't like him much In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119945 Kneasy wrote: >> Young Potter is the eponymous hero and the viewpoint we get from the > books is his. And not by any stretch of the imagination can that > viewpoint be considered as unbiased. If Harry doesn't like something, > then it must obviously be wrong; if somebody disagrees with Harry, then > they are wrong. Rubbish. Harry is the one that's usually wrong - with > unerring and boring predictability. Thanks, Kneasy! This first hit me when Snape, in PoA, told Harry off for sneaking into Hogsmeade, which made Harry livid; yet, when Lupin said almost the same thing to him a moment or two later, he was contrite. As seen through Harry's filter, Snape was wrong and Lupin was right! This pattern has continued throughout, and it will cost perhaps him, and certainly others, the same price that Sirius paid when Harry "forgot" that Snape was in the Order and ran off to save the world himself. Ba From dolis5657 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 15 21:52:49 2004 From: dolis5657 at yahoo.com (dcgmck) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 21:52:49 -0000 Subject: Adults "failing" Harry (was: Themes in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119946 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nkafkafi" wrote: > [snip] Neri: > I don't think you should admit defeat so fast, SSSusan :-) What Dungrollin forgot to add is that in response to this urgent request, DD gets from Harry one of those snake urges, and DD tells us later that he did notice it. So DD had a very clear indication that he is losing the battle on Harry's mind, and still he hasn't done anything about it, and left Harry alone. Regardless of Harry's fault, I think this passage is actually the strongest indication of DD's failings. This is not about being nice to Harry; this is about winning or losing the damn war. And I might add that DD knew that, while Harry had no reason to think that this is about something more than his own security. Neri dcgmck: I have to disagree with the argument that DD had a responsibility to do more than he did. Between the danger of LV getting any clear read on him through Harry's eyes/mind and the matter of HP's right to free choice, DD's responsibility was to do precisely as he did: let Harry choose his own path and hope desperately that he would choose wisely. For all the complaining about lack of guidance towards adulthood, there seems to be little acknowledgement that growth comes from facing just such choices and living with the consequences. Yes, Harry has been allowed to get pretty spoiled in his first five years at Hogwarts, feted and permitted license by an overly indulgent administration, or so it seems. But if he is to mature into the hero promised by the prophecy, then he does need the experience in battle that he has gained. It's unfortunate that a by-product is a growing sense of entitlement, if indeed that is what has happened, as Snape suggests. As parents, teachers, mentors, don't we sometimes have to stand by and watch loved ones indulge in folly, despising the "bad" choices despite our best given advice, in order to allow our charges to see the value of pruning their own vices to grow into stronger human beings? Nah, watch 'em fall, pick 'em up, dust 'em off, and send 'em back into the fray. All that matters is the final score, right? From templar1112002 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 15 21:54:58 2004 From: templar1112002 at yahoo.com (templar1112002) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 21:54:58 -0000 Subject: Ron's and Sirius' Laughing, strange Curse Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119947 Please allow me some ponderings here. I was re-reading a part of PoA last night, trying to remember what the book really said as opposed to what the movie tells us, when I was struck by Fudge's words while at The Three Broomsticks, when Harry learns about Sirius being his godfather. Fudge recalled the explosion when Peter supposedly died: "...'I tell yeh, if I'd got ter Black before little Pettigrew did, I wouldn't've messed around with wands -I'd've ripped him limb -from - limb,' Hagrid growled. 'You don't know what you're talking about, Hagrid,' said Fudge sharply. 'Nobody but trained Hit Wizards from the Magical Law Inforcement Squad would have stood a cance against Black once he was cornered. I was Junior Minister in the Department of Magical Catastrophes at the time, and I was one of the first on the scene after Black murdered all those people. I -I will never forget it. I still dream about it sometimes. A crater in the middle of the street, so deep it had cracked the sewer below. Bodies everywhere. Muggles screaming. And Black standing there laughing, with what was left of Pettigrew in front of him... a heap of bloodstained robes and a few-a few fragments-'..." PoA page 208 p/b SE. 1) After we witnessed Hagrid's fight with the Aurors in OoTP, if there was any doubt as to Fudge's knowledge of anything whatsoever, more specifically 'half-breeds' and 'squibs', that statement above clears it up. We now know that Hagrid could've very well ripped Sirius apart without using wands. 2) It has always puzzled me why Sirius had been caught *laughing*... On one hand, even when I first read that part, I thought that if he was one of VM's strongest Death Eaters, he was a very stupid one for having been caught laughing in the middle of the explosion scene. OTOH, even after I learned that he was not a Death Eater, I still thought that he was stupid, for having stayed there and laughing, to top it all. But then, I thought of the MoM fight in OoTP, when Ron got hit with that strange curse that made him laugh and act goofy in such a dangerous situation... Perhaps that was the same curse that got Sirius to act like a madman back then, it would be a more 'acceptable' explanation of his reckless behaviour, IMO. Plus, even though Peter was not at the MoM, it could very well be a curse that only DEs use. I wonder if Harry is ever going to ask about those hexes/curses that the Ron and Hermione got hit with at the MoM... What do you think? Has this been discussed before? Marcela From R.Vink2 at chello.nl Wed Dec 15 22:11:15 2004 From: R.Vink2 at chello.nl (Renee) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 22:11:15 -0000 Subject: Adults "failing" Harry (was: Themes in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119948 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dungrollin" wrote: > > > SSSusan: > > Frankly, I DO think hearing it *directly* from DD rather than > > through someone else might well have made a difference to Harry, > > yes. And that's partly because I'm proposing that the > > communication from DD would have had to have included NOT JUST > > that it's "really really really important," but, yes, also > > something specific about how Voldy might have the capability of > > feeding him not just actual images but *false* ones to trick him. > > If I were Harry, I'd think that kind of specific [but-not-too- > > specific for The Order!] information would have scared me into > > believing DD. But maybe I'm wrong. You've got a point about > > Harry's curiosity after all.... > > > Dungrollin: > > Just remembered something in 'The Centaur and the Sneak' just after > DD knocks out Fudge and the other chaps from the ministry, and > before he disappears from his office with Fawkes : > > "Listen to me, Harry," He said urgently. "You must study Occlumency > as hard as you can, do you understand me? Do everything Professor > Snape tells you and practise it particularly every night before > sleeping so that you can close your mind to bad dreams - you will > understand why soon enough, but you must promise me -" > The man called Dawlish was stirring. Dumbeldore seized harry's > wrist. > "Remember - close your mind -" > > Didn't make much difference to Harry's attitude, did it? Renee: I've been following this discussion for a while now, and I'm inclined to believe nothing would have made much difference to Harry's general attitude and eventual failure in OotP. Or maybe I should say: nothing could have. OotP is the book where Harry had to be angry and rebellious, ignore the advice of his elders and make mistakes and fatal errors of judgement. The rock bottom volume of the series, where Harry's development is concerned. This is not a RL case of your average problematic teenager who might have overcome his difficulties if only responsible and well-meaning adults would have given him the proper guidance (might have: even in RL this doesn't always work). Harry is the pre-ordained Hero in what is - underneath a layer of deceptive realism - essentially a work of fantasy and adventure. He screws up because he *has* to, in the greater scheme of things and according to his creator's plan; it's a stage he has to go through in order to be ready for his task. Perhaps it's possible to argue that the execution of the plan could have been better, if so many people think (some of) the adults act implausibly and seem unbelievably stupid/careless/whatever. On the other hand, it's also a tribute to the author's imagination and powers of make-believe that people do tend to discuss this in terms of what would have been right and realistic. Renee From eloiseherisson at aol.com Wed Dec 15 22:12:04 2004 From: eloiseherisson at aol.com (eloise_herisson) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 22:12:04 -0000 Subject: Hogwarts letters Re: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: <001001c4cb56$92c7a540$e14dfea9@talyn> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119949 "nienna_anwamane" : > I've wondered if maybe after the parents flat out refuse to allow their > child to go to Hogwarts their memories are erased, but can the child's > magic abilities be bound so they can't use them any more? > > It would solve the security question and prevent untrained wizard or witch > from running around. Eloise: It certainly would. But as you point out they would be *untrained* and wouldn't be in possession either of wands or of the knowledge they needed to use their powers properly. Perhaps memory modification is all that's required: the number of muggle born witches and wizards appears very small in proportion to the general population, so perhaps the natural but untrained witches and wizards are the psychics and people with odd abilities like ESP and psychokinesis. Maybe they're even some of the magicians and illusionists we believe to be practising trickery. ~Eloise From manawydan at ntlworld.com Wed Dec 15 22:47:15 2004 From: manawydan at ntlworld.com (manawydan) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 22:47:15 -0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Who goes to Hogwarts References: <1102993206.33849.15365.m24@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <000f01c4e2f8$07a77bc0$704b6d51@f3b7j4> No: HPFGUIDX 119950 Yb speculated: > So maybe Professor Sprout, or McGonnagall, or even Dumbledore > himself would go to these Muggleborns to explain what Hogwarts is > and other things. Perhaps they provide directions to Diagon Alley. > Note that no directions were provided to any of these places were > provided in Harry's letter. We can make a few guesses about this. > This means that: > > a. The letter-writer (presumably McGonnagall, though just because > she signed it doesn't she wrote it; it read a lot like a form letter) > assumed that Harry knew about these things, and therefore assumed > Petunia knew how to get to these places, and had told Harry. > > b. The letter-writer knew that Hagrid was taking the letter to > Harry, and as such, would tell him all these things. This means that > the contents of the letter were altered /specifically/ for Harry, > and that most letters to Muggleborns include directions, etc. > > c. Directions to Diagon Alley and the platform, and other bits of > information are /never/ distributed in letters. The ambassador is > expected to tell the Muggleborns about these things. Where Harry > would fit in this one is not known, since Petunia should probably > have only limited knowledge of this stuff. > > I think (c) is the most likely scenario, just because that's how I > feel today. There's an enormous potential for culture shock, isn't there, for an 11 year old with two Muggle parents, suddenly arriving in the WW where absolutely nothing works the same way that it did at home. And yet the ones we've seen, like Hermione and the Creeveys, seem not to be falling into the kind of traps that you'd expect, even when they first arrive. Maybe, as well as the usual reading list, there's a special "Welcome to the Wizarding World" book for people in this category which explains what to expect. Harry of course, having wizarding parents, wouldn't be directed to this. (Also for plot reasons we, the readers, have to have the same questions answered so just shuffling Harry off to read a book offstage wouldn't be very satisfying!) Cheers Ffred O Benryn wleth hyd Luch Reon Cymru yn unfryd gerhyd Wrion Gwret dy Cymry yghymeiri From gbannister10 at aol.com Wed Dec 15 22:56:10 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 22:56:10 -0000 Subject: I don't like him much In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119951 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > > Kneasy wrote: > > One of the many definitions of adulthood is being willing to > accept > > responsibility for one's own actions. OK, he's not an adult yet, > > though some posters seem to think he should be regarded as such, > even though he has never shown any sign of acting like an adult. > > > Potioncat: > You are dead right here. Molly is blasted for treating him like a > child. Yet hardly anyone thinks he's should be expected to > demonstrate maturity around Snape. Harry is a teenager and he acts > just like one! (And the one he acts like lives in my house!) > > >Kneasy: > > He'll probably manage it, unless JKR decides to wipe him out, the > > all-too-common reward for heroes in the sagas (after all, what's > the use of an ex-hero?). But unless he shows some marked changes I > can't see myself ever liking him as a character. > > Potioncat: > That must make it difficult to read the books! But he is a > teenager. They are adorable one minute and pains in the...in > the...in the elbow the next. I expect he'll turn out OK > > Potioncat, signging off to go hug her teenager. Geoff: I set out, in message 118574, to show that in my opinion - which is "usually wrong with unerring and boring predictability" - that I see Harry as following the progress of a fairly average teenager, having studied these strange creatures in their natural habitat for over 30 years. I recall my own teenage years, veering between overweening confidence and being downright terrified of getting something miniscule wrong. All the guys I knocked around with often considered ourselves as being the best thing since sliced bread, the next saviours of the world - being far more streetwise than our adult contacts - until something unforeseen knocked out the confidence rungs from our ladders and down we came. Our parents treated us either as young adults or overgrown kids, not being quite sure which we were; we didn't know either. Aren't we being just as perverse as Harry or any other teen? He is expecting adults to conform to his perceptions of how his friends and mentors should behave - and let's face it, the way some of them are treating him is way out of line - while we, as adults, are expecting him to know all the nuances and interpretations of our behaviour which only come with experience over many years. Thinking about the Wizarding World and the world of Hogwarts, my mind was drawn to a quote from "To serve them all my days" by R.F.Delderfield. this book, to which I have referred in the past traces the history of a young teacher who comes to a public school in the west of England in the aftermath of World War I and works his way up to become Headmaster. His new wife, who comes into the school when he is Head has to find her way around the interplay of characters in the school..... "It's a bit like the Habsburg Court," she said one day, "a frightenly complex system of protocol, checks, counterchecks and balances with all kinds of silent pressures and intrigues going on and you hovering over the safety-valve watching for explosions.." What a great description of the relations between adults and teens. I'm sorry, Kneasy, but I am going to take up a diametrically opposed position to you; it wouldn't be so much fun if I didn't, now would it? I can see myself in Harry and I can see so many of the boys who passed through my hands in school and so many of them have gone on and become perfectly normal, reasonable members of society afterwards.... Geoff http://www.aspectsofexmoor.com Exmoor National Park views, walks and West Somerset Railway steam and diesel views From jkusalavagemd at yahoo.com Wed Dec 15 23:13:18 2004 From: jkusalavagemd at yahoo.com (Haggridd) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 23:13:18 -0000 Subject: FILK: The Story of Harry and Voldie Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119952 Steve Sondheim's "Follies" (1971) has been described as a "success d'estime", which means those persons with so-called "taste" liked it, but it flopped at the box office. I think the show is a success in every way. The songs are rich and wonderful. This song, "The Story of Lucy and Jessie" has a great melody as well as an incredibly complex interwoven rhyme scheme. I dedicate this filk to a wizard of impeccable taste and extensive knowledge of the works of Stephen Sondheim, Caius Marcius. In respect, I will comply with his "don't pronounce the `T' in `Voldemort'" rule, even though I believe the correct non-filking pronunciation does voice the `T'. -Haggridd SCENE: Albus Dumbledore recounts the climactic battle between Harry Potter and Lord Voldemort in OOP as they struggle within the same being, making it hard to kill the one without harming the other. The Order of the Phoenix members are helpless to intervene, except in song. THE STORY OF HARRY AND VOLDIE ALBUS: Here's a little story 'bout the Wizards' War About two names of note. Let us call them Harry "P" and Voldie "Mort". About whom Jo Rowling wrote. Now Harry's immaturity Along with insecurity Has come from being only six and ten. Voldie Mort's impurity's Not buried in obscurity. The Dark Mark flies much higher than Big Ben. Given their antipathy, You may ask why Their two destinies are tied. Blood from both reside, Inside. Harry's not scary, He's very sincere. Voldie's an oldie, He radiates fear. Harry's young, he's no oldie. Voldie knows he is scary. Harry's mingled with Voldie, And Voldie, Harry. You see, Voldie's voracious He feeds from a snake. Harry is gracious; Eats Hagrid's rock cake. Voldie cannot be gracious, Harry's mingled with Voldie. I find it most vexatious But it's foretold, eh? Takes it's tolls, Bewitching spells and switching roles. Harry wants to vanquish Voldie's lies, Voldie wants to see that Harry dies. CHORUS, ORDER OF THE PHOENIX: Now when you see Harry "P," Callow, fallow Harry "P," Let him know he's stronger than he can see. Now if you see Voldie "Mort," Rotting, plotting Voldie "Mort," Tell him that he's more disgusting than a wart. (Sorry, Caius Marcius, the "T" is pronounced this time, I couldn't resist.) Wary Harry, Moldy Voldie, Wary Harry Moldy Voldie ALBUS: Harry keeps hurtin' >From scar on his head. Voldie is certain. He wants Harry dead. Harry really is certain. Voldie's causing his hurtin'. If Harry and Voldie could just disentwine, I could tell you someone Who would finally feel just fine! ORDER OF THE PHOENIX: Wary Harry ALBUS: Just fine! ORDER OF THE PHOENIX: Dressy Jessie... Moldy Voldie ALBUS: Just fine! ORDER OF THE PHOENIX: Wary Harry ALBUS: Just fine! ORDER OF THE PHOENIX: Moldy Voldie ALL: Tell 'em that they ought to part by hook or crook, Legilimancy opens Harry like a book! ALBUS: Yeah! Haggridd 12/16/2004 From manawydan at ntlworld.com Wed Dec 15 23:19:18 2004 From: manawydan at ntlworld.com (manawydan) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 23:19:18 -0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Hogwarts letters Re: Choosing sides References: <1103147627.46361.58256.m13@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <004301c4e2fc$81d9ff40$704b6d51@f3b7j4> No: HPFGUIDX 119953 Annette wrote: >Homeschooling is also legal in the U.S., but is supervised by the state >school system - parents have to file reports with the local school that the >child would have been attending - so there would still be a record of the >child. The child must be in school up till a certain age, and the record of >the child would rest either with the state school or with the private >school, if that's where they attend. I was not ignorant of homeschooling, I >was including those kids in the "state school" group. Even if the >authorities are slow and infrequent about checking, I can't imagine that the >entire population of Hogwart's would go unnoticed decade after decade. I >also assume that the majority of the muggle-borns attended regular school >prior to Hogwart's (and, as you state, only 1% are homeschooled). That was >my point anyway ;) Simplest explanation is often the best. It's done by magic. Yes, the child is still on the records. But there's a spell so that no one notices that they've gone missing. That's the magic. It's not remarkable. People's eyes just slide over it. Same thing's true for the family. Yes, everyone knows that they've got a child at Hogwarts. But no one ever mentions it because it's not remarkable. Their minds just slide away when they think about it. The WW has had 300 years' practice in hiding itself from Muggles. I would imagine those spells are pretty watertight by now. Cheers Ffred O Benryn wleth hyd Luch Reon Cymru yn unfryd gerhyd Wrion Gwret dy Cymry yghymeiri From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 15 23:25:07 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 23:25:07 -0000 Subject: Adults "failing" Harry (was: Themes in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119954 > Neri: I don't think you should admit defeat so fast, SSSusan :-) What Dungrollin forgot to add is that in response to this urgent request, DD gets from Harry one of those snake urges, and DD tells us later that he did notice it. So DD had a very clear indication that he is losing the battle on Harry's mind, and still he hasn't done anything about it, and left Harry alone. Regardless of Harry's fault, I think this passage is actually the strongest indication of DD's failings. This is not about being nice to Harry; this is about winning or losing the damn war. And I might add that DD knew that, while Harry had no reason to think that this is about something more than his own security. Dcgmck: I have to disagree with the argument that DD had a responsibility to do more than he did. Between the danger of LV getting any clear read on him through Harry's eyes/mind and the matter of HP's right to free choice, DD's responsibility was to do precisely as he did: let Harry choose his own path and hope desperately that he would choose wisely. Alla: I have to agree with Neri here. Freedom of choice is great, but the problem I see is that Harry COULD NOT choose wisely without all necessary information. Dumbledore had this information and chose not to share it with Harry. It IS the indicator of his failings, IMO. From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 15 21:59:20 2004 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 21:59:20 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore "failing" Harry (was: Adults "failing" Harry (was: Themes in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119955 >>Betsy wrote earlier: >>And when Dumbledore felt that Harry was of an age to affect the Wizarding world, he planned on letting Harry in on things. But at this point in the game, Dumbledore's plan was to keep Harry off the board. So no actions or inactions to worry about.<< > SSSusan: >"So no actions or inactions to worry about." If that's the case, then I guess I'd say DD really screwed this one up. That remark might have held true for most kids, but hasn't DD figured Harry out YET when it comes to this? "Someone's after the SS? I'll go stop him!" "Someone's taken Ginny? I'll go get her!" I mean, this kid is nothing if not "action" when the pressure's on or when he perceives something needs to be done. I think DD should have expected Harry to have continued this tendency, esp. after the attack on Mr. Weasley and his role in it. Harry think he needs to DO things, and he'll do them on the sly if he thinks he has to. DD should have been aware of that.< Betsy: Oh, Dumbledore screwed up, no doubt about it. The thing is, this royal screw up deepened the character of Dumbledore for me. One of the reasons I love OotP because it takes the rather two dimensional Puppetmaster!Dumbledore and fleshed him out into a somewhat flawed though still wise and knowledgeable man. As Potioncat pointed out: >I think JKR has written very stong adult characters...we all seem to have strong opinions about them...but she still has to have them fail in some way. She's done a nice job of creating flaws, misunderstandings, ill will between characters so that in some believable way these powerful witches and wizards drop the ball and Harry has to run with it.< Betsy: Yes, Harry has shown time and time again that he will take action against Voldemort. In the very first book he practically had the prophecy figured out. "If I get caught before I can get to the Stone, well, I'll have to go back to the Dursleys and wait for Voldemort to find me there, it's only dying a bit later than I would have, because I'm never going over to the Dark Side!" (SS, pg. 270, paperback) As early as that, Harry knew that it was a death struggle between him and Voldemort. But Dumbledore admits at the end of OotP that he still wanted to keep Harry safe and out of the battle. I know it's been popular to believe that Dumbledore sanctioned ahead of time all the actions Harry's taken against Voldemort over the years, but I theorize that Dumbledore was actually against Harry constantly putting his neck on the line. (See message #119865 for a specific example of my thinking on this.) I do agree with you, SSSusan, that Dumbledore made a catastrophic miscalculation with how he handled Harry. And that mistake ended in the death of Sirius. He admits this himself at the end of OotP. So I will be shocked if he backslides in book 6. What I'm trying to show is that the mistake was believable for the character of Dumbledore. I see Dumbledore thinking, "Yes, Harry likes to take matters into his own hands, so keep him ignorant of what is going on and that will keep him safe. Watch him, protect him, but don't bring him into play." Of course, he fails to take into account Harry's own resourcefulness and Voldemort's ruthlessness. As HunterGreen says: >But the darkness is going to touch Harry no matter what. That is a fact. There is nothing that anyone can do to avoid that.< Betsy: But what about the Occlumency lessons? Earlier I wrote: >>This was another miscalculation of Dumbledore's, though I think a more understandable one. Snape is a teacher, a damn good one as per his NEWT successes, and he assigns Snape a teaching job. Why on earth would Dumbledore have to explain to the pupil that he should listen to his teacher and take his lesson seriously?<< And SSSusan and HunterGreen replied: > SSSusan: > Um... because it's SNAPE and HARRY, that's why. Snape is *not* a damn good teacher when it comes to Harry. And if DD isn't aware of the animosity between them, then that's shocking. McGonagall certainly is aware of it. ["Yes, Potter, *Potions*."] [snip] >If it's wartime and you know each General's strengths & weaknesses, don't you plan strategy accordingly?< >HunterGreen: >Even if he were getting taught occulmency from Lupin (for example) Harry would need to understand WHY it was so important. Convincing Harry of its importance without giving anything away is already hard enough, why have one of Harry's enemies explain it to him? And there's no way Dumbledore was unaware of Harry's mistrust of Snape. [snip] >But it didn't have a chance unless Harry really cared about it, you can't FORCE something to care about something, which is what all the adults around him were doing ("Harry, you must learn occulmency." "Why?" "YOU MUST!!!" -- that doesn't accomplish anything).< Betsy: In the first place, Snape *does* explain to Harry why the lessons are important. "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 might be able to access your thoughts and feelings in return --" "And he might try to make me do things?" asked Harry. [...] "He might," said Snape..." (OotP, pg 533, US hardback ed.) And Snape tries, in his own special way, to curb Harry's curiosity on the subject of what's in the DoM. On page 591 of OotP hardback, Snape specifically tells Harry this it is his, Snape's, job to figure out what the Dark Lord is after, and Harry should try and block his visions from Voldemort. Also, Snape was doing rather well at teaching Harry. In the first lesson, Harry threw Snape off with a stinging hex, and in the next lesson Harry is able to enter into Snape's memories. Of course the lessons all went to hell in a handbasket when Harry snooped into Snape's Pensieve. But the refusal to continue teaching Harry lands firmly on Snape's shoulders. I do not fault Dumbledore for thinking that a man in his mid-to late- thirties, in the middle of a war, should be able to put aside petty school-boy squabbles and teach a young boy a skill upon which the battle may hang. Dumbledore has shown time and again that McGonagall and Snape are his two right hands at Hogwarts. He has entrusted Harry's care to Snape in the past, and though Snape seems to dislike Harry, Snape has done his job. I don't think it was a stretch for Dumbledore to think Snape capable of carrying out this particular task. (Frankly, I think Snape's response to Harry's snooping is a bit bizzare. Not the anger, but the refusal to continue the lessons. If anything was OoC, this was, and I hope to see more on it in book 6.) But I do think that Harry was so curious about what was in the DoM, that only the truth would have satisfied him. No matter his strength in Occlumency, Harry really wanted to know what was behind the door. Dumbledore was the only one with the authority to tell him the truth, and he put keeping Harry ignorant of his place in the battle ahead of everything else. And because of that mistake, someone died. >SSSusan: >And DD... well, the more I think about this, the more I guess I really do think he goofed up.< I agree with you completely. Dumbledore really, really messed up. But not in an out-of-character way, IMO. And his mistake provided the catalyst for a really good story and some major character unfoldment and/or growth. For the sake of Harry, I wish Dumbledore had not made the choices he made. For the sake of the story... well, it made a sad kind of sense to me, and threw an interesting light on past events. Bring on Book 6, I say! --Betsy PS I'm going to be away from computers for about a week, so if I don't respond to folks, I'm not sulking, I'm just gone! From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 15 23:43:36 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 23:43:36 -0000 Subject: Is Dumbledore still useful? Was:Re: Adults "failing" Harry (was: Themes in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119956 > SSSusan: Sure, I think he could still lead. As long as "a foolish old man" is still capable of learning and changing [unlike a 37'ish young fool -- whoops! different thread], then I think there is hope he can lead. Alla: LOL! So, yes, if 150 old man can change, then 37 year old should be able too. :o) You said it yourself, not me. :o) SSSusan: If Harry was spending OotP discovering that adults are fallible, then I think DD was spending OotP discovering that he, in particular, is fallible and that he MUST begin to treat Harry as an adult and full member of The Order now. If he can do that, and if the connection between Harry & Voldy has been altered now [??] such that Harry isn't in the same kind of danger he was in in OotP from it, then I think DD & Harry can pull that off. Alla: I am all for it, honestly. I HOPE that Dumbledore learned from his mistakes at the end of OOP as he claimed, but we shall see . Hopefully, we won't have to wait for too long. :) Alla: I frankly come close to thinking exactly that and that is why I contrary to many posters' opinion think that it is possible that Dumbledore will survive the end of the series to see that once again he interepreted the prophecy incorrectly. SSSusan: An interesting take, Alla. I still think DD's toast, but you could be right. If you're right, though, what would JKR's message to us be in that? That DD is an old fool yet again? I can't quite imagine her wanting to do that. Alla: I will try to clarify, see if it makes sense to you. If JKR "disillusioned" Dumbledore's supposed infallibility in front of readers' eyes, he cannot be very effective mentor to Harry, right? So, traditional feature of the heroic quest,where mentor dies, leaving hero battle evil all alone does not necessarily has to be fulfilled. Why? Because an old mentor even though alive is as good as dead. He is of no help to the hero. I guess I meant Dumbledore being wrong about prophecy interpretation to be an extra bonus only. I would love Dumbleodre to be surprised about something, anything. Prophecy interpretation will do quite nicely. Alla: I don't know. Could you convince me that Dumbledore is still capable of being good general and good headmaster at the same time and if not who will be the better one, in your opinion? SSSusan: Who better? I've no idea! I've heard many people speculate that Snape would take over The Order if DD died, but I can't see that -- at least not without his full story coming out so's people could trust him. Assuming Lupin's not ESE!, and even as much as I like him, he's still not forceful leadership material, imo. McGonagall has been DD's trusted Deputy Headmistress for awhile now, and she seems quite capable in that role, but we're not even all in agreement that she's even *in* The Order, let alone in on all the secrets or competent to head it up. snip. Alla: Well, no, of course not Snape (in my opinion only of course) Him as a leader will be a disaster in making, IMo. Can you see him... I don't know to be fair, especially if he also has to take on headmaster duties? Can you see him as a person who can unite all four houses? Not me. Do we really have any doubt that houses will be united at the end of the series in one way or another? I like the idea that secondary characters may get more space and I LOVE Longbottoms idea, if they recover, of course. We do know that they were very popular in WW. I also like Kingsley idea, but sure he has to be more developed for that. Going back to Dumbledore, I now remember that in one of the recent chats (was it also march 2004?) JKR got a question about Dumbledore's capabilities and she replied something to the efect that judging by the battle at MOM, he is quite capable still. Again, I would say we will see. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 15 23:57:23 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 23:57:23 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore "failing" Harry (was: Adults "failing" Harry (was: Themes in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119957 > Betsy: > In the first place, Snape *does* explain to Harry why the lessons are important. "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 might be able to access your thoughts and feelings in return --" "And he might try to make me do things?" asked Harry. [...] "He might," said Snape..." (OotP, pg 533, US hardback ed.) Alla: Oh, but Snape does not say nearly enough, at least IMO. I argued earlier that it is NOT possible from this quote to deduce that Voldemort will send Harry false visions. Harry IS aware about the connection between himself and Voldemort at least since GoF. Nothing new here. So, connection got stronger, not a good thing, but nothing extraordinary. Just one more bad news from Harry's everyday life, IMO at least. :o) Snape does not say that Voldemort may send Harry false visions. I would say that "make me do things" is much easier to interpret as try to put Harry under Imperio and he fought it off previously. Betsy; I agree with you completely. Dumbledore really, really messed up. But not in an out-of-character way, IMO. And his mistake provided the catalyst for a really good story and some major character unfoldment and/or growth. For the sake of Harry, I wish Dumbledore had not made the choices he made. For the sake of the story... well, it made a sad kind of sense to me, and threw an interesting light on past events. Bring on Book 6, I say! Alla: This part of your post I completely agree with. Yes, I also argued earlier that Dumbledore's screw ups were perfectly in character. he showed an unfortunate pattern of hiding information from harry since book 1, IMO and at the end of OOP we have "road to hell is covered with good intentions", IMO. I agree that it made for great read, but when we look at the characters within story, sure we want to tell them what they did wrong, right? :) From Zarleycat at aol.com Thu Dec 16 00:28:56 2004 From: Zarleycat at aol.com (kiricat2001) Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 00:28:56 -0000 Subject: Adults "failing" Harry (was: Themes in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119958 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > SSSusan: (replying to Betsy) > I snipped your earlier section on the other adults, and I do > understand what you're saying about their behaviors being > understandable. You pointed out, for instance, that Sirius and > Molly *aren't* really Harry's parents. My only argument remaining > about that would be that if they are going to say that they're "all > the parent" he has or that they're "good as a parent" that they > really should step up and act like it. Sirius, I think, tried to do > this at the start but didn't keep it up consistently. Molly > probably felt that she *was* acting like a parent by doing what she > is wont to do with her own children -- (over?)protecting them. So, > I agree with you that some of these people's actions were > understandable. I wish they'd looked at whether they were actually > *helpful* to Harry, though. And DD... well, the more I think about > this, the more I guess I really do think he goofed up. Marianne: But, to cut Molly and Sirius a little slack, they were separated by distance from Harry a good part of the time. And the methods of communicating with Harry at Hogwarts were not secure. Owl post could be intercepted, as was evident from Hedwig's injury. Fire conversations were dicey, as evidenced from Umbridge nearly catching Sirius. The Secret-Decoder-Ring-Snazzy-Chat-Instrument that the Order members supposedly can use amongst themselves for communication was not available to Harry. So for large stretches of time Harry was effectively isolated from these two. Could they have swung effectively into full parental mode during Christmas after the attack on Arthur? Ideally, yes, assuming they didn't end up fighting over Harry. Molly should have looked beyond her own worries and troubles to concentrate a bit more on Harry. Of course, that might have required going against DD's instructions, which she seems completely unwilling to do. Sirius should have risen above his "somewhat unbalanced state" (per JKR) and put aside his own problems and issues to press Harry into speaking at the times when Harry didn't want to and to answer Harry truthfully and completely on the one time Harry really needed and was seeking answers. (OTOH, maybe Sirius was so surprised that Harry actually came out and asked questions that he couldn't come up with a response ;-).) Having said that, I agree that all of the adults stumbled badly in OoP. But I think this was quite deliberate on JKR's part. The reader has to decide for him/herself whether it's believable that everyone failed Harry to some extent so consistently throughout the book, during the very year where things went so wrong with the Harry's relations with the Ministry, with the changes that took place at Hogwarts, etc. Marianne From mhbobbin at yahoo.com Thu Dec 16 02:01:46 2004 From: mhbobbin at yahoo.com (mhbobbin) Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 02:01:46 -0000 Subject: Ron's and Sirius' Laughing, strange Curse In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119959 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "templar1112002" wrote: > > > > 2) It has always puzzled me why Sirius had been caught *laughing*... > On one hand, even when I first read that part, I thought that if he > was one of VM's strongest Death Eaters, he was a very stupid one for > having been caught laughing in the middle of the explosion scene. > OTOH, even after I learned that he was not a Death Eater, I still > thought that he was stupid, for having stayed there and laughing, to > top it all. > > But then, I thought of the MoM fight in OoTP, when Ron got hit with > that strange curse that made him laugh and act goofy in such a > dangerous situation... Perhaps that was the same curse that got > Sirius to act like a madman back then, it would be a > more 'acceptable' explanation of his reckless behaviour, IMO. Plus, > even though Peter was not at the MoM, it could very well be a curse > that only DEs use. I wonder if Harry is ever going to ask about > those hexes/curses that the Ron and Hermione got hit with at the > MoM... > > What do you think? Has this been discussed before? > > Marcela mhbobbin now: It has been discussed before but more related to the Cheering Charm that is mentioned several times in PoA. At one point Harry and Ron learn Cheering Charms, and Hermione missed the class. And in typical JKR fashion, the focus is on how stressed-out HErmione could have used a cheering charm. Later in the exam, Harry overdoes the charm on Ron, and Ron must go to a quiet room in order to stop laughing and finish the exam. I've long thought that the only reason the Cheering Charm is in PoA is to hint at why Sirius might have been laughing after the Pettigrew explosion. Of course, it's pretty hard to defend yourself when you're laughing hysterically. --And I've also thought Pettigrew threw the Cheering Charm at Sirius, while some other wizard--possibly Fudge--caused the explosion. I don't accept that Pettigrew killed 13 wizards in that duel. But now you point out Ron being hysterical again in the MoM. It appears to be a strong second example of how a person might be laughing hysterically while in a serious situation. Very interesting. Mhbobbin From azakitpgr at yahoo.co.uk Thu Dec 16 00:45:24 2004 From: azakitpgr at yahoo.co.uk (Paul) Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 00:45:24 -0000 Subject: Home ed in UK (was Hogwarts letters Re: Choosing sides) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119960 Annette wrote: > If the WW is "hidden", wouldn't there be a truancy issue? Paul ? No, UK truancy laws apply only to a child on a school register. Mac wrote: > The authorities ARE supposed to check, Paul ? Technically if an LEA (Local Education Authority) is aware of the existence of a child they may make informal enquiries to ensure an education is taking place as per (section 7 of the Education Act 1996 (previously section 36 of the Education Act 1944)) (see http://www.education-otherwise.org/Legal/SummLawEng&Wls.htm for full info) but there is no duty on parents to register or inform an LEA of Home Ed and so it is quite common for children to just drop out of the system between primary & secondary school without the authorities being any the wiser. Annette also wrote: > Homeschooling is also legal in the U.S., > I was not ignorant of homeschooling, I was including those kids > in the "state school" group. Paul ? Noted. Paul From javalorum at yahoo.ca Thu Dec 16 01:13:09 2004 From: javalorum at yahoo.ca (javalorum) Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 01:13:09 -0000 Subject: Who goes to Hogwarts In-Reply-To: <000f01c4e2f8$07a77bc0$704b6d51@f3b7j4> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119961 > Ffred wrote: > There's an enormous potential for culture shock, isn't there, for > an 11 year old with two Muggle parents, suddenly arriving in the > WW where absolutely nothing works the same way that it did at home. > And yet the ones we've seen, like Hermione and the Creeveys, seem > not to be falling into the kind of traps that you'd expect, even > when they first arrive. > > Maybe, as well as the usual reading list, there's a special "Welcome > to the Wizarding World" book for people in this category which > explains what to expect. > > Harry of course, having wizarding parents, wouldn't be directed to > this. (Also for plot reasons we, the readers, have to have the same > questions answered so just shuffling Harry off to read a book > offstage wouldn't be very satisfying!) I always have this question about Hermione. She grew up as a normal muggle child, yet she knows a lot more about WW than Harry. Of course she reads a lot and caught up, but it doesn't seem to explain why she gasps like a wizard kid whenever she hears LV's name, prior to ootp. This reaction should be more of a habit than knowledge. Where did she get that? Or was she just trying very hard to fit in? I know Harry's supposed to be the central character and all, but it would've been nice to see Hermione's (and other kids) reaction to all the wonderful things the WW has to offer. It appears Harry is the only one constantly fascinated by all these. Hermione just kinda come along and takes in everything almost to the degree of boredom, like Ron and other wizard kids. She's Miss Know-it-all, but I thought experience and knowledge are two competely different things. Amy From jazmyn at pacificpuma.com Thu Dec 16 03:36:11 2004 From: jazmyn at pacificpuma.com (Jazmyn Concolor) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 19:36:11 -0800 Subject: Hogwarts letters Re: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: <001001c4cb56$92c7a540$e14dfea9@talyn> References: <001001c4cb56$92c7a540$e14dfea9@talyn> Message-ID: <41C102AB.1030908@pacificpuma.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119962 Some points: School records causing concern: Most countries allow home schooling and private tutors. It would not take much for select Wizards to get required muggle credentials to verify the education of young wizards. Muggles knowing about the WW: Many muggles do know, but 'who would believe them?'. Fudge even admits that he told the Prime Minister about Sirius. (book quote) Fudge has been criticized by some members of the International Federation of Warlocks for informing the Muggle Prime Minister of the crisis. "Well, really, I had to, don't you know," said an irritable Fudge. "Black is mad. He's a danger to anyone who crosses him, magic or Muggle. I have the Prime Minister's assurance that he will not breathe a word of Black's true identity to anyone. And let's face it-who'd believe him if he did?" (end book quote) There are also the close relatives of Wizard children who know. The MOM doesn't modify the memories of ALL muggles who know about them, only those who they feel might present them with some danger or those who were traumatized. The poor guy running that campground? Well, he was comedy relief for one and might have called out the authorities and caused the quidditch game to be canceled for another... The MOM does have better things to do then run around modifying the memories of every muggle who happens to see even the slightest bit of magic, after all.. Most muggles would convince themselves they were seeing things anyways, as most people generally don't believe in magic. I mean if a muggle magician can create the illusion of the Statue of Liberty disappearing, then most people will just think its 'just a trick with mirrors' anyways... Saves officials in the Wizard World a lot of work at any rate.. I can't see them worrying about modifying the memories of the parents and the child in the case of muggle parents not wanting their kid to go to a school for Wizards. If Wizards have no morals concerning modifying memories of innocent people, then they would likely have no morals concerning using spells to charm parents into accepting it. Magical Powers being 'removed': Other than breaking someone's wand, which doesn't totally prevent them from doing magic, I see no canon to support the idea they can remove a wizard's powers. If they could, WHY would they bother having Azkaban prison??? There is some suggestion that prolonged exposure to dementors might cause a wizard's power to be damaged in some way, but as it seems there is no actual example of a wizard who did lose their powers this way, it might only be wizards who lost their confidence or became so lost in madness that they forgot they could do magic..? I see no actual evidence that powers can be simply 'removed'. I suspect that ALL magical children are somehow given some guidance, even if they have to arrange for a Wizard to befriend the child, such as a teacher in a muggle school. (Brings to mind Miss Switch and other magical school teacher stories) or a magical 'relative' who just turns up. Jazmyn From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Thu Dec 16 02:09:58 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 18:09:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Ron's and Sirius' Laughing, strange Curse In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041216020959.22273.qmail@web53101.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119963 Marcela wrote: > OTOH, even after I learned that he was not a Death > Eater, I still > thought that he was stupid, for having stayed there > and laughing, to > top it all. > > But then, I thought of the MoM fight in OoTP, when > Ron got hit with > that strange curse that made him laugh and act goofy > in such a > dangerous situation... Perhaps that was the same > curse that got > Sirius to act like a madman back then, it would be a > more 'acceptable' explanation of his reckless > behaviour, IMO. Plus, > even though Peter was not at the MoM, it could very > well be a curse > that only DEs use. Juli: I've always thought thay Pettigrew hit Sirius with some sort of curse before he killed the seven muggles, cut his own finger and escaped as a rat in the sewers. I mean, how else could he have done it all? He must have done something to Sirius before, so my guess is a Confussing spell or a Mad spell, something like that. Juli __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Find what you need with new enhanced search. http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250 From pjarrett at gmail.com Thu Dec 16 02:11:50 2004 From: pjarrett at gmail.com (Patrick Jarrett) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 21:11:50 -0500 Subject: FILK: Voldemort went down to Hogwarts Message-ID: <3def328f04121518112aefd93f@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119964 The Charlie Daniel's Band has a well known song, "The Devil went down to Georgia.' In which it tells the story of the Devil betting that he can out fiddle a boy named Johnny, a bet he proceeds to lose. I was listening to it earlier and suddenly the words, "Voldemort went down to Hogwarts" wormed their way into my ear. It loses metre at certain points but on the whole, for my first filk, I think it came out quite good. -- Patrick Voldemort went down to Hogwarts He was lookin' for the wizard to kill He was in a mood 'Cause he was in a brood So he was willin' to make a deal When he came upon this young man Wavin' his wand and swingin' it about And Voldemort jumped Up on an enchanted stump And said boy let me tell you what I guess you didn't know it but I'm wizard here too And if you care to take a dare I'll make a bet with you Now you cast a pretty good spell, boy But give this wizard his due I'll bet a wand of gold Against your soul 'Cause I know I'm better than you The boy said my name's Harry And it might be wrong But I'll take your bet And you're gonna regret 'Cause I'm the best there's ever been Harry flick up your wand and cast your spell hard Cause hell's broke loose in Hogwarts and Voldemort's on his guard And if you win you get this shiny wand made of gold But if you lose Voldemort takes your soul. Voldemort drew out his wand And he gave a frightful yell And fire flew from his fingertips As he waved up his spell Then he flicked the wand through the air And it made a evil hiss And a band of deatheaters joined in And it sounded something like this [Instrumental] When Voldemort finished Harry said well you're pretty good old son Just sit right in that chair right there And let me show you how it's done He cast Fire on the Mountain Run evil, run Harry's got Voldemort in a trap Lucius in a jail cell, clawing and crying Narcissa does your gobl'n bite No child, no [Instrumental] Voldemort howled in anger Because he knew that he'd been beat And he cast that golden wand On the ground at Harry's feet Harry said, Voldy just come on back If you ever leave from Azkaban I done told you once you son of a gun I'm the best there's ever been And he cast Fire on the Mountain Run evil, run Harry's got Voldemort in a trap Lucius in a jail cell, clawing and crying Narcissa does your gobl'n bite No child, no [Instrumental to end] From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu Dec 16 03:15:17 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 03:15:17 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore "failing" Harry (was: Adults "failing" Harry (was: Themes in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119965 Betsy: > Oh, Dumbledore screwed up, no doubt about it. The thing is, this > royal screw up deepened the character of Dumbledore for me. One > of the reasons I love OotP because it takes the rather two > dimensional Puppetmaster!Dumbledore and fleshed him out into a > somewhat flawed though still wise and knowledgeable man. SSSusan: An excellent point. In showing his fallibility, we see a more complex character, one who's not this perfect, omniscient, omnipotent total genius, but a man who can be ruled by the heart like the next man, capable of making an unwise decision like the rest of us. Betsy: > Yes, Harry has shown time and time again that he will take action > against Voldemort. In the very first book he practically had the > prophecy figured out. "If I get caught before I can get to the > Stone, well, I'll have to go back to the Dursleys and wait for > Voldemort to find me there, it's only dying a bit later than I > would have, because I'm never going over to the Dark Side!" (SS, > pg. 270, paperback) As early as that, Harry knew that it was a > death struggle between him and Voldemort. > > But Dumbledore admits at the end of OotP that he still wanted to > keep Harry safe and out of the battle. SSSusan: You may have put your finger on a big part of the reason why, when I first read about the prophecy, I said, "Huh? That's IT?" It just wasn't a shock to us, the readers, and as you're noting here, it really *probably* wasn't that much of a shock to Harry either. Well, he's known all along that Voldy wanted to kill him, and *maybe* he didn't know the other side of it -- that only he could possibly vanquish Voldy -- but I have a feeling that down deep he suspected something like that. Do some of you think Harry was truly & totally surprised by that part of the prophecy? Betsy: > I do agree with you, SSSusan, that Dumbledore made a catastrophic > miscalculation with how he handled Harry. And that mistake ended > in the death of Sirius. He admits this himself at the end of > OotP. So I will be shocked if he backslides in book 6. What I'm > trying to show is that the mistake was believable for the > character of Dumbledore. I see Dumbledore thinking, "Yes, Harry > likes to take matters into his own hands, so keep him ignorant of > what is going on and that will keep him safe. Watch him, protect > him, but don't bring him into play." Of course, he fails to take > into account Harry's own resourcefulness and Voldemort's > ruthlessness. > Dumbledore really, really messed up. But not in an out-of- > character way, IMO. And his mistake provided the catalyst for a > really good story and some major character unfoldment and/or > growth. For the sake of Harry, I wish Dumbledore had not made the > choices he made. For the sake of the story... well, it made a > sad kind of sense to me, and threw an interesting light on past > events. SSSusan: And in addition to Harry's resourcefulness, DD failed to take into account Harry's impatience and rashness and "saving people thing." Believable? On one hand, I think you've convinced me yes. Just disappointing still. :-| Siriusly Snapey Susan From annemehr at yahoo.com Thu Dec 16 03:49:27 2004 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 03:49:27 -0000 Subject: Is Dumbledore still useful? Was:Re: Adults "failing" Harry (was: Themes in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119966 > Alla: > > I frankly come close to thinking exactly that and that is why I > > contrary to many posters' opinion think that it is possible that > > Dumbledore will survive the end of the series to see that once > > again he interepreted the prophecy incorrectly. > > SSSusan: > An interesting take, Alla. I still think DD's toast, but you could > be right. If you're right, though, what would JKR's message to us be > in that? That DD is an old fool yet again? I can't quite imagine > her wanting to do that. > > But if there is some way that someone in the Order can determine that > he is wrong about the prophecy in time to use that information, I > suppose I could see it happening. But not if it's just to show, > *again*, how DD is fallible. > > I'm positive there are many posters here who've thought a LOT more > about this potential scenario and could comment. > Annemehr: I'll take a stab at this one. I've also been thinking Dumbledore would survive the series, and that he'd find he'd been wrong about the prophecy. I wonder if Harry is actually the only one who could know what needs to be done, and won't actually realise it until just before he has to do it. This way, Dumbledore *can't* tell Harry what to do; he either tries and is mistaken, or he realises it's not up to him to give orders to Harry at this point. I don't think anyone else in the Order would have anything to do with it, although Ron and Hermione, knowing Harry as they do, may be of some help to him coming to see what's necessary (not that they'd figure it out for him, just help him understand himself better). If there's any "message" here, I guess it would be that when you've grown up, you can take what your mentor (or mentors and parents) have taught you, but then you have to chart your own course. The mentor doesn't have to die for this to happen; in fact I like it better if he doesn't, because it allows Harry to assume responsibility of his own accord rather than have it merely thrust upon him. For the record, I think so far, responsibiliy *has* been thrust upon Harry. If Dumbledore begins really teaching Harry in HBP, it'll be the first time he's truly fulfilled his role as mentor. Only after that, with all the wisdom DD can give him, can Harry really and freely take responsibility upon himself. Annemehr From annemehr at yahoo.com Thu Dec 16 04:25:10 2004 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 04:25:10 -0000 Subject: I don't like him much In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119967 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "barbarahanson" wrote: > > Kneasy wrote: > >> Young Potter is the eponymous hero and the viewpoint we get from > the > > books is his. And not by any stretch of the imagination can that > > viewpoint be considered as unbiased. If Harry doesn't like > something, > > then it must obviously be wrong; if somebody disagrees with Harry, > then > > they are wrong. Rubbish. Harry is the one that's usually wrong - > with > > unerring and boring predictability. > > > Thanks, Kneasy! This first hit me when Snape, in PoA, told Harry off > for sneaking into Hogsmeade, which made Harry livid; yet, when Lupin > said almost the same thing to him a moment or two later, he was > contrite. As seen through Harry's filter, Snape was wrong and Lupin > was right! > Ba Can't let this one go! I'm not arguing with Kneasy, after all there's no accounting for taste (sure, it could be mine that's unaccountable...) -- When Snape caught Harry sneaking back from Hogsmeade, Harry acted like a typical guilty kid. Fear and dread are mentioned, silence and lies are offered in turn, until: "How extraordinarily like your father you are, Potter," Snape said suddenly, his eyes glinting. "He, too, was exceedingly arrogant. A small amount of talent on the Quidditch pitch made him think he was a cut above the rest of us, too. Strutting around the place with his friends and admirers ... the resemblance between you is uncanny." Which leads shortly to: "His head was so swollen -" *Now* Harry's livid. What Lupin said: "Dont' expect me to cover up for you agian, Harry. I cannot make you take Sirius Black seriously. But I would have thought that what you have heard when the Dementors draw near you would have had more of an effct on you. Your parents gave their lives to keep you alive, Harry. A poor way to repay them - gambling their sacrifice for a bag of magic tricks." Either they didn't say exactly the same thing, or that's some filter Harry's got. ;) Annemehr From annemehr at yahoo.com Thu Dec 16 04:54:12 2004 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 04:54:12 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore "failing" Harry (was: Adults "failing" Harry (was: Themes in OotP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119968 > Betsy: > Also, Snape was doing rather well at teaching Harry. In the first > lesson, Harry threw Snape off with a stinging hex, and in the next > lesson Harry is able to enter into Snape's memories. Of course the > lessons all went to hell in a handbasket when Harry snooped into > Snape's Pensieve. But the refusal to continue teaching Harry lands > firmly on Snape's shoulders. Annemehr: Actually, those lessons were apparently going rather badly, for whatever reasons (I once posted all the reasons I could find for their failure, and came up with five or six, I believe, two of which were Harry and Snape). But the Pensieve incident happened in April. So, Occlumency lessons every Monday from sometime in January to sometime in April -- that's about three months, and we don't hear of any other successes. Betsy: (Frankly, I think Snape's response to Harry's snooping is a > bit bizzare. Not the anger, but the refusal to continue the > lessons. If anything was OoC, this was, and I hope to see more on it > in book 6.) Annemehr: I believe it was Pippin who gave me an answer for this. Snape had been very careful to put that memory in the Pensieve for the lessons, apparently for good reason. But now, that memory is in Harry's head, and bound to surface as one of the painful ones summoned by Legilimency. That could be a problem. Annemehr From steve at hp-lexicon.org Thu Dec 16 05:00:47 2004 From: steve at hp-lexicon.org (hp_lexicon) Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 05:00:47 -0000 Subject: Birthdays on website In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119969 > Potioncat: > The Lexicon has a calendar of important dates in the Timelines > section. Here is a link to the calendar that includes birthdays. > It is updated as JKR posts new information (And we all thank Steve > and his staff very much!) > You say that and I discovered to my horror that it is NOT up to date with the latest additions. You might want to try this timeline as well: http://www.hp-lexicon.org/about/sources/jkr.com/jkr-com.html#Timeline That is the timeline of Jo's site and Belinda Hobbs, who is the editor for that section, has it very nicely up to date with all the birthdays. I apologize for other pages not being caught up. We're working on it and I expect everything to be added from Jo's recent site update within a week or so. Steve The Lexicon From annemehr at yahoo.com Thu Dec 16 05:13:43 2004 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 05:13:43 -0000 Subject: False Alarm? Was:Re: Adults "failing" Harry (was: Themes in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119970 > > Dungrollin: > > Just remembered something in 'The Centaur and the Sneak' just after > DD knocks out Fudge and the other chaps from the ministry, and > before he disappears from his office with Fawkes : > > "Listen to me, Harry," He said urgently. "You must study Occlumency > as hard as you can, do you understand me? Do everything Professor > Snape tells you and practise it particularly every night before > sleeping so that you can close your mind to bad dreams - you will > understand why soon enough, but you must promise me -" > The man called Dawlish was stirring. Dumbeldore seized harry's > wrist. > "Remember - close your mind -" > > Didn't make much difference to Harry's attitude, did it? Annemehr: WAIT! There wasn't time for it to make a difference! Right after that scene, the next chapter starts, which is "Snape's Worst Memory!" The day after DD leaves, Umbridge tries to give Harry Veritaserum, and they're interrupted by Fred and George's fireworks. That very night, Harry's having the corridor dream again and got all the way into the prophecy room when two fireworks collide and wake him up. The next day is his next lesson, and he's dreading Snape seeing how far he'd gotten in that last dream. It also says: "With a surge of guilt he realised that he had not practised Occlumency once since their last lesson: there had been too much going on since Dumbeldore had left; he was sure he would not have been able to empty his mind even if he had tried." [OoP ch. 28] That lesson never even happened; Harry did the Pensieve-dive instead. The only thing I can't figure is that the day of the Veritaserum and fireworks was apparently a day of classes, but Harry had Occlumency the *next* day and I thought the lessons were on Mondays? Annemehr From javalorum at yahoo.ca Thu Dec 16 03:08:11 2004 From: javalorum at yahoo.ca (javalorum) Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 03:08:11 -0000 Subject: I don't like him much In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119971 > Kneasy wrote: > > One of the many definitions of adulthood is being willing to > > accept responsibility for one's own actions. OK, he's not an > > adult yet, though some posters seem to think he should be > > regarded as such, even though he has never shown any sign of > > acting like an adult. > > Potioncat: > You are dead right here. Molly is blasted for treating him like a > child. Yet hardly anyone thinks he's should be expected to > demonstrate maturity around Snape. Harry is a teenager and he acts > just like one! (And the one he acts like lives in my house!) Hi, I guess I'm too old to remember my teenage years but not yet old enough to have teenage kids yet, so I do tend to see HP as someone of my equal. Maybe someone younger, close to a younger brother or something, but I don't really have motherly love or auntie's indulgence to treat him like my kid. It's possible that this whole attitude is wrong right from the start. But at least, I think that may still represent a portion of the readers since now I share Kneasy's point of view. My definition of a successful book is the kind that can set up a situation (including characters), and through narration, make most readers feel for it and believe it. I'm not into wizards and magic, but I'm fascinated by the world HP books created. That's what I call a success. So, similarly, a good children/young adult book (and I did read a few ;P) is the kind that make you go, "oh yeah, that's what being a child/teenager's like, I almost forgot", or "gee, I never thought about it that way, maybe I should start treating kids better from now on", even if you are just a society-hardened adult who doesn't have kids. To me, OotP is just not as successful in creating a believeable world with engaging characters as the previous books. Thanks for your attention, Java From R.Vink2 at chello.nl Thu Dec 16 08:13:25 2004 From: R.Vink2 at chello.nl (Renee) Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 08:13:25 -0000 Subject: Adults "failing" Harry (was: Themes in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119972 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "kiricat2001" wrote: >all of the adults stumbled badly in > OoP. But I think this was quite deliberate on JKR's part. The reader > has to decide for him/herself whether it's believable that everyone > failed Harry to some extent so consistently throughout the book, > during the very year where things went so wrong with the Harry's > relations with the Ministry, with the changes that took place at > Hogwarts, etc. > > Marianne Renee: Adults have failed Harry before in various ways, though never as spectacularly as in OotP. But IMO the main difference between Book 5 and the previous books is that 1) Harry sees it more clearly now and 2) before OotP it was Harry who saved the day all the time, with the help of his friends. This time he's among the failures. A huge step towards becoming an adult. Renee From R.Vink2 at chello.nl Thu Dec 16 08:25:15 2004 From: R.Vink2 at chello.nl (Renee) Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 08:25:15 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore "failing" Harry (was: Adults "failing" Harry (was: Themes in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119973 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "horridporrid03" wrote: > Also, Snape was doing rather well at teaching Harry. In the first > lesson, Harry threw Snape off with a stinging hex, and in the next > lesson Harry is able to enter into Snape's memories. Of course the > lessons all went to hell in a handbasket when Harry snooped into > Snape's Pensieve. But the refusal to continue teaching Harry lands > firmly on Snape's shoulders. Renee: But wouldn't Snape have continued if Dumbledore had ordered him to? It was Dumbledore who realised it couldn't work, and probably not just because of Snape's grudge, but also because of Harry's lack of co-operation. I think he realised Harry's inner resistance towards Snape was too strong for him to learn much, and that going on was useless. From spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com Thu Dec 16 09:20:59 2004 From: spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com (dungrollin) Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 09:20:59 -0000 Subject: False Alarm? Was:Re: Adults "failing" Harry (was: Themes in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119974 > Dungrollin: > > Just remembered something in 'The Centaur and the Sneak' just after > DD knocks out Fudge and the other chaps from the ministry, and > before he disappears from his office with Fawkes : > > "Listen to me, Harry," He said urgently. "You must study Occlumency > as hard as you can, do you understand me? Do everything Professor > Snape tells you and practise it particularly every night before > sleeping so that you can close your mind to bad dreams - you will > understand why soon enough, but you must promise me -" > The man called Dawlish was stirring. Dumbeldore seized harry's > wrist. > "Remember - close your mind -" > > Didn't make much difference to Harry's attitude, did it? Annemehr replied: WAIT! There wasn't time for it to make a difference! Right after that scene, the next chapter starts, which is "Snape's Worst Memory!" The day after DD leaves, Umbridge tries to give Harry Veritaserum, and they're interrupted by Fred and George's fireworks. That very night, Harry's having the corridor dream again and got all the way into the prophecy room when two fireworks collide and wake him up. The next day is his next lesson, and he's dreading Snape seeing how far he'd gotten in that last dream. It also says: "With a surge of guilt he realised that he had not practised Occlumency once since their last lesson: there had been too much going on since Dumbeldore had left; he was sure he would not have been able to empty his mind even if he had tried." [OoP ch. 28] That lesson never even happened; Harry did the Pensieve-dive instead. The only thing I can't figure is that the day of the Veritaserum and fireworks was apparently a day of classes, but Harry had Occlumency the *next* day and I thought the lessons were on Mondays? Dungrollin again: According to the Lexicon timeline, DD leaving the school, and the last Occlumency lesson takes place some time in April, and the vision of Sirius and the midnight outing to the ministry between the 8th and 15th of June. I think that's plenty of time to pull one's socks up. Harry had two months of Hermione nagging him about whether the dreams had gone, and to keep practising, during which time both Lupin and Sirius *again* emphasised how important it was to learn Occlumency, and still he didn't do anything. But you're right, if Harry hadn't made the effort between January and April, another two months wasn't going to help much, was it? Dungrollin (He also had Occlumency lessons on Wednesdays ? check the lexicon timeline) From sydpad at yahoo.com Thu Dec 16 13:02:17 2004 From: sydpad at yahoo.com (Sydney) Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 13:02:17 -0000 Subject: Snape stopping the lessons (was: Dumbledore "failing" Harry ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119975 Betsy wrote: > (Frankly, I think Snape's response to Harry's snooping is a > bit bizzare. Not the anger, but the refusal to continue the > lessons. If anything was OoC, this was, and I hope to see more on it > in book 6.) I always assumed that Snape stopped because he couldn't trust himself not to hurt Harry next time they were locked in the dangerous intimacy of the lessons. Leg/Occ already had Harry on his knees with a splitting headache; it seems like the sort of thing that requires pretty delicate control on the part of the Legilimens in order not to do actual damage (Obliviate is probably a cousin spell, I reckon). I imagined Snape sent a message to Dumbledore saying, "sorry, boss, I know it's vital but the next time I'm alone with my figurative fingers around that kid's throat, so help me I don't know what I might do." There's three reasons I think this. First, the exploding jar, arm-grabbing thing. Snape has NEVER been physically violent; even in the Shrieking Shack, he just yelled at Harry to get out of the way. I think he's someone whose anger issues are so extreme that what we've seen of him IS his version of iron self-control. His capacity for violence is something he is extremely aware of, and I think he found his loss of control in even touching Harry quite frightening. Second, the whole silent-treatment thing. Harry found it relaxing, but personally I would have taken it as an extremely ominous development, like the barking doberman that stops barking and starts intensely staring... yikes! I think that meant, Snape is not trusting himself to interact with Harry AT ALL. Snape doesn't seem like someone who does passive-aggression! Third, there's the fact that despite Lupin and Sirius announcing their immediate intention of speaking to Snape, but nothing ever comes of it. I don't think the Order would have just let it go, unless it was pretty clear it would be worse to push on with the lessons than to stop them. This is what I took from it anyways; it never occured to me that he was just being spiteful. Surely he'd just have then cranked up the humiliation factor of the lessons themselves, not stopped them altogether? And I agree with Betsy, it's out of character for Snape to be irresponsible. -- Sydney From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Thu Dec 16 13:32:11 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 13:32:11 -0000 Subject: Snape stopping the lessons (was: Dumbledore "failing" Harry ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119976 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Sydney" wrote: > > Betsy wrote: > > > (Frankly, I think Snape's response to Harry's snooping is a > > bit bizzare. Not the anger, but the refusal to continue the > > lessons. If anything was OoC, this was, and I hope to see more on it > > in book 6.) > > I always assumed that Snape stopped because he couldn't trust himself > not to hurt Harry next time they were locked in the dangerous intimacy > of the lessons. > > This is what I took from it anyways; it never occured to me that he > was just being spiteful. Surely he'd just have then cranked up the > humiliation factor of the lessons themselves, not stopped them > altogether? And I agree with Betsy, it's out of character for Snape > to be irresponsible. > Just an interjection. What many forget is that this Occlumency thing was not a formal lesson. It was extra-curricular and Snape was only doing it because DD had asked him to. In effect he was giving up his own free time on this ungrateful wretch who was making no attempt to comply with DD's wishes and was poking his nose into Snape's private affairs to boot. If I'd been Snape I'd have strangled the little creep. Kneasy From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu Dec 16 14:02:51 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 14:02:51 -0000 Subject: Snape stopping the lessons (was: Dumbledore "failing" Harry ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119977 Sydney: > > Second, the whole silent-treatment thing. Harry found it relaxing, > > but personally I would have taken it as an extremely ominous > > development, like the barking doberman that stops barking and > > starts intensely staring... yikes! I think that meant, Snape is > > not trusting himself to interact with Harry AT ALL. Snape doesn't > > seem like someone who does passive-aggression! SSSusan: Snipped most of this post, which I enjoyed very much. Only had a "huh-uh" reaction to one bit of this section. I agree that Harry might've been wise to have been more concerned by the silence than he was. He was so thrilled to not be sneered at or humiliated that he enjoyed the silence and did well with his potion [interesting point, that]. But, as you say, silence from Snape could be ominous. Now, here's where I disagree. Seeing's how I *do* think Snape deliberately dropped Harry's potion vial after his back was turned/Hermione had cleaned out Harry's cauldron, I'd disagree with your final sentence: if I'm right, that would be *textbook* passive- aggressive. :-) Sydney: > > I always assumed that Snape stopped because he couldn't trust > > himself not to hurt Harry next time they were locked in the > > dangerous intimacy of the lessons. > > > > This is what I took from it anyways; it never occured to me that > > he was just being spiteful. Surely he'd just have then cranked up > > the humiliation factor of the lessons themselves, not stopped them > > altogether? And I agree with Betsy, it's out of character for > > Snape to be irresponsible. Kneasy: > Just an interjection. > What many forget is that this Occlumency thing was not a formal > lesson. > It was extra-curricular and Snape was only doing it because DD had > asked him to. In effect he was giving up his own free time on this > ungrateful wretch who was making no attempt to comply with DD's > wishes and was poking his nose into Snape's private affairs to boot. > If I'd been Snape I'd have strangled the little creep. SSSusan: You mean that kid who is the *only* one who can vanquish Voldy? The only chance for the WW to be rid of Voldy's terror? You mean the teacher who's an Order member, who ostensibly believes that ending VW2 is the current primary goal in life? Yeah, those two. Come on, Kneasy. It's not such a minor matter as an off-duty teacher being kind to a shirty little kid by offering to give up his time. It's an order to a soldier from a commanding officer, and it involves the pupil *most* important to the cause, whether you like him or not. Harry screwed up, and Snape had a right to be pissed over the Pensieve snooping and Harry's lack of trying. But Snape screwed up, too, imo. So did Dumbledore, big time. However, it's wrong, imo, to diminish what was going on by reducing it to some voluntary extra- curricular opportunity. Siriusly Snapey Susan From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Thu Dec 16 14:34:29 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 14:34:29 -0000 Subject: I don't like him much In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119978 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > > I set out, in message 118574, to show that in my opinion - which > is "usually wrong with unerring and boring predictability" - that I > see Harry as following the progress of a fairly average teenager, > having studied these strange creatures in their natural habitat for > over 30 years. > Kneasy: Wrong? Who cares about posters being wrong? Anyway, you deserve sympathy for having suffered the company of a barely civilised sub-species for all those years. Geoff: > I recall my own teenage years, veering between overweening confidence > and being downright terrified of getting something miniscule wrong. > All the guys I knocked around with often considered ourselves as > being the best thing since sliced bread, the next saviours of the > world - being far more streetwise than our adult contacts - until > something unforeseen knocked out the confidence rungs from our > ladders and down we came. Our parents treated us either as young > adults or overgrown kids, not being quite sure which we were; we > didn't know either. Aren't we being just as perverse as Harry or any > other teen? He is expecting adults to conform to his perceptions of > how his friends and mentors should behave - and let's face it, the > way some of them are treating him is way out of line - while we, as > adults, are expecting him to know all the nuances and interpretations > of our behaviour which only come with experience over many years. > > "It's a bit like the Habsburg Court," she said one day, "a frightenly > complex system of protocol, checks, counterchecks and balances with > all kinds of silent pressures and intrigues going on and you hovering > over the safety-valve watching for explosions.." > > What a great description of the relations between adults and teens. > > I'm sorry, Kneasy, but I am going to take up a diametrically opposed > position to you; it wouldn't be so much fun if I didn't, now would > it? I can see myself in Harry and I can see so many of the boys who > passed through my hands in school and so many of them have gone on > and become perfectly normal, reasonable members of society > afterwards.... > Kneasy: Not sure the parallels are applicable. Sure; I can remember my teens too, even though it was over 40 years ago. Mostly OK with horrible and embarassing interludes. IIRC the rules, mores and undercurrents were mostly within the peer group; adults were considered as something different altogether. Mind you, in those days there was a common rite-of-passage where one passed formally from sub-adult to the real thing - the 21st birthday. It was the accepted dividing line after which non-adult excuses and behaviour wouldn't wash. Before then some allowances were made, no matter that you held down a job, had a family or had been conscripted into the forces, though those allowances tapered off dramatically after 18. But still, until you were 21 you couldn't be sole signatory on a contract for example; you could avoid the responsibilities of adulthood to a greater or lesser extent. In the WW this doesn't seem to be the case. DD more or less coerces Harry into accepting the so-called magical contract in GoF, even though Harry was not a 'signatory' to the deal. Others (for one reason or another) assumed that he was and that the contract would be enforced even though he was only 14. Responsibilities come early in the WW it seems. Understandable. Everybody over the age of 11 has a wand - and they can do things with wands way beyond the scope of a calculator or geometry set. Bloody dangerous in the wrong (or foolish) hands. What would be the equivalent in the Real World? Is there one? It's as if every schoolkid is geared up for mischief, malicious damage, assault or grevious bodily harm. Fancy teaching a mob like that, Geoff? Just don't turn your back on the class, whatever you do. Outside Hogwarts there are the underage magic rules with severe penalties; inside Hogwarts - well, it's up to the staff to keep the little monsters in line. But generally nearly all the students act responsibly most of the time. A certain behavioural standard is expected and complied with; students know that they will be held responsible for their actions. So although not formally of age pleas for mitigation based on immaturity are unlikely to be accepted as a sole or even major factor. It's my contention that Harry hasn't yet got to grips with how far this expectation stretches - it goes further than just messing about with wands, the closest RW parallel I can come up with is Midshipmen in Nelson's navy and even that shouldn't be taken too far. But basically, Harry isn't hacking it on the responsibility front. Kneasy From annemehr at yahoo.com Thu Dec 16 14:39:45 2004 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 14:39:45 -0000 Subject: False Alarm? Was:Re: Adults "failing" Harry (was: Themes in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119979 > Dungrollin again: > > According to the Lexicon timeline, DD leaving the school, and the > last Occlumency lesson takes place some time in April, and the > vision of Sirius and the midnight outing to the ministry between the > 8th and 15th of June. I think that's plenty of time to pull one's > socks up. Annemehr: On the one hand, yes, he had plenty of time to get some practice in. But on the other, if he couldn't or wouldn't do it (some of each, I think) in three months with a teacher firing Legilimency at him, did he ever expect to make any progress on his own? Oh, all right, I concede the point. Dumbledore's entreaty ought to have made him give it real effort even without a teacher. > Dungrollin: > (He also had Occlumency lessons on Wednesdays ? check the lexicon > timeline) Annemehr: I was going by the beginning of ch. 24 where Snape says "You will receive private lessons once a week[...]" and then "I will expect you at six o'clock on Monday evening." But then at the end of the first lesson, he orders Harry back on Wednesday -- so, did Snape switch days or add a day? From willsonkmom at msn.com Thu Dec 16 14:45:58 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 14:45:58 -0000 Subject: False Alarm? Was:Re: Adults "failing" Harry (was: Themes in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119980 > Annemehr: > I was going by the beginning of ch. 24 where Snape says "You will > receive private lessons once a week[...]" and then "I will expect you > at six o'clock on Monday evening." But then at the end of the first > lesson, he orders Harry back on Wednesday -- so, did Snape switch days > or add a day? Potioncat: I always thought he'd gone to twice a week, but I'd forgotten the original plan was for once a week....So, was Snape doing "more" than was expected of him? And someone in a different post referred to Snape as a soldier. While the comparison is frequently made, nothing in canon supports the Order being run anything like an army. Dumbledore may be in charge of it, but there is no military discipline or order to it. From gbannister10 at aol.com Thu Dec 16 15:14:34 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 15:14:34 -0000 Subject: I don't like him much In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119981 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" wrote: > Kneasy: > Wrong? Who cares about posters being wrong? > Anyway, you deserve sympathy for having suffered the company of a > barely civilised sub-species for all those years. Geoff: I don't need your sympathy. I had a marvellous time and am still as sound of mind as I ever was... Don't even consider an answer to that. :-) Thanks to the good offices of friendsreunited.co.uk I am in contact with about three dozen ex-pupils today. Most of them sadly have thinning hair and middle-aged spread but I continue in my sylph-like way, slimline and unchanged in weight for the best part of 50 years keeping my intellectual muscles in trim by crosing verbal swords with the many and varied interpreters of the good JKR. We often reminisce over the old days and the tricks they "thought" they were getting past me. I could teach McGonagall a few tricks I think.. Geoff http://www.aspectsofexmoor.com Exmoor National Park views, walks and West Somerset Railway steam and diesel views From stevejjen at earthlink.net Thu Dec 16 15:26:21 2004 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 15:26:21 -0000 Subject: Is Dumbledore still useful? Was:Re: Adults "failing" Harry (was: Themes in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119982 Annemehr: > If there's any "message" here, I guess it would be that when you've > grown up, you can take what your mentor (or mentors and parents) have > taught you, but then you have to chart your own course. The mentor > doesn't have to die for this to happen; in fact I like it better if he > doesn't, because it allows Harry to assume responsibility of his own > accord rather than have it merely thrust upon him. > > For the record, I think so far, responsibiliy *has* been thrust upon > Harry. If Dumbledore begins really teaching Harry in HBP, it'll be > the first time he's truly fulfilled his role as mentor. Only after > that, with all the wisdom DD can give him, can Harry really and freely > take responsibility upon himself. Jen: I'm not sure Dumbledore is truly a mentor in Harry's case. Not in the traditional sense of a teacher or a 'trusted counselor or guide' as the Webster's says. He's really done very little guiding, only offered suggested interpretations of events after the fact and taken actions behind the scenes on Harry's behalf. Dumbledore would most likely *not* be a significant part of Harry's life save for hearing the prophecy. Since Dumbledore's primary role in Harry's life concerns his interpretation of the prophecy and resulting actions to safeguard Harry (through 5 books now), it seems a little anticlimactic to then make Dumbledore's interpretation wrong in the end. That doesn't preclude Harry from realizing the "kill or be killed" is metaphorical rather than literal, though. Harry has always chosen his own actions; we don't see him ponder what Dumbledore would do in in a certain circumstance. If anything he relies on Hermione's advice more than Dumbledore (and not often at that). I'm not really expecting to find out the prophecy is irrelevant, but I do expect to see Harry come to his own understanding of it in Book 6. Didn't JKR say that on her website or in Edinburgh? That Harry needs some time to think about the prophecy and will then share it with those closest to him. Jen From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 16 15:52:35 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 15:52:35 -0000 Subject: False Alarm? Was:Re: Adults "failing" Harry (was: Themes in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119983 > Potioncat: snip. > And someone in a different post referred to Snape as a soldier. > While the comparison is frequently made, nothing in canon supports > the Order being run anything like an army. Dumbledore may be in > charge of it, but there is no military discipline or order to it. Alla: Sorry, but to me the fact that the primary reason for Order existence is fighting the war with Voldie supports the contention that Order is military organisation, I don't think any extra references even warrnted. JMO, of course. :o) And I completely agree with Susan - Snape was given an order from his commander. He screwed it up in spectacular way, regardless of others screwed ups. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 16 15:59:09 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 15:59:09 -0000 Subject: False Alarm? Was:Re: Adults "failing" Harry (was: Themes in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119984 > Annemehr: > On the one hand, yes, he had plenty of time to get some practice in. > But on the other, if he couldn't or wouldn't do it (some of each, I > think) in three months with a teacher firing Legilimency at him, did > he ever expect to make any progress on his own? > > Oh, all right, I concede the point. Dumbledore's entreaty ought to > have made him give it real effort even without a teacher. > Alla: Wait, Anne. Why are you conceding? :o) I thought that you meant in your previous post that Harry did not have time to try and change his attitude DURING the lessons and before he dived in to Snape's pensieve. I mean sure during those two months Harry could have continue clearing his mind, which he did not do, but if Dungrolin suggests that he was supposed to study Occlumency on his own, I disagree. Harry does not know how to study this subject. We are not even sure that Snape was teaching it properly, how was Harry supposed to learn it on its own? Clear your mind does not equal learning Occlumency, IMO. It is just meditation exercises, which help you studying. I am in full agreement with you that Dumbledore's words to Harry came waaay too late (I also think that they were not sufficient, but that is beyond the point of this post) From willsonkmom at msn.com Thu Dec 16 18:02:16 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 18:02:16 -0000 Subject: You're in the A rmy, now. wasFalse Alarm? Was:Re: Adults "failing" Harry (in tP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119985 > > Potioncat: > snip. > > > And someone in a different post referred to Snape as a soldier. > > While the comparison is frequently made, nothing in canon supports > > the Order being run anything like an army. Dumbledore may be in > > charge of it, but there is no military discipline or order to it. > > > Alla: > > Sorry, but to me the fact that the primary reason for Order > existence is fighting the war with Voldie supports the contention > that Order is military organisation, nip Potioncat: Oops...I'm getting hit off and on list on this one! First off, I agree. We're told this is a war and Dumbledore is in charge of an underground organization that is fighting the enemy. And almost all of us have used the comparison of DD being a General, the others being officers or soldiers. Myself included. But, along with DD's other faults, the Order is not being run like a military organization. Where's the chain of command? Who's in charge? What training do they have? If you ask me, the Order functions like a group of friends who are pulling together for a common goal, but with very different ideas of how to accomplish and that goal, and not agreeing on who the other members should be. Actually, my point of all this, has nothing to do with "someone's" point which was about Snape and Occlumency. And I think I agreed with it, as it were. (BTW, "someone" is better known as SSSusan) But for the purpose of this post, I'm just grumbling that the Order is not well run. Pvt. Potioncat, signing off. From norek_archives2 at hotmail.com Thu Dec 16 18:17:06 2004 From: norek_archives2 at hotmail.com (Janet Anderson) Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 18:17:06 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Does Viktor Krum become an important character? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119986 Catching up, I see that Carol asked: >That's where *my* problem with Krum arises. He's a Durmstrang student >and has therefore been taught the Dark Arts. Does that include the >Unforgiveable Curses? And if he's been taught to cast them (he didn't >have any trouble casting a Crucio under the Imperius Curse) does that >mean he's used them on other people? Surely not. Even Karkaroff >wouldn't teach his students to torture and kill each other. That would >be suicidal. How do they practice the Unforgiveables, then? Do they >cast them at dummies or mirrors or targets? And do they Imperio each >other? (Is that the way the DEs learn them, too?) So much of it is >mental--you have to really want to hurt someone to cast an effective >Cruciatus Curse. You have to be a cold manipulator to cast an >effective Imperius Curse. And you have to either hate deeply or be >wholly indifferent to human life to cast an AK. At least that's the >way I understand it. It's the mindset required as much as the effects >of those curses that makes them Unforgiveable. Well, we have already seen the Unforgiveable Curses being taught -- by Crouch masquerading as Moody. I think all the Hogwarts students present now know *how* to cast one, but even if they wanted to, they undoubtedly don't have the mindset. (Okay, maybe Draco.) Based on Krum's Crucio attack on Fleur, I think an Imperio will serve as a substitute for the mindset required (but probably wouldn't provide knowledge of how to cast the Crucio itself). >But I worry about him. He's been taught the Dark Arts, apparently >including the Unforgiveables. He was Karkaroff's favorite boy, and we >know what Karkaroff is or was. Is it safe to have Viktor on the good side? We already have Snape on the good side (in my opinion). Everything you could say about Viktor regarding the Dark Arts, and a whole lot worse, can be said (and undoubtedly has been said, to Dumbledore and others) about Snape. So if we can trust Snape (and some of us can, while at the same time thinking he needs the occasional swift kick), then we should be able to give a seventeen-year-old boy the benefit of the doubt. Janet Anderson From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Thu Dec 16 18:34:01 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 10:34:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Lucius betrayed? (WAS Re: JKR's cryptic answer: Who sent the Lestranges...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041216183401.38083.qmail@web53102.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119987 --- chrusotoxos wrote: > And Lucius is mystery in himself...I'm thinking that he could be an > anti-Snape, and this > could explain why Voldemort didn't punish him and why Karkaroff > didn't mention him as a very important supporter of LV. My personal theory about Lucius is that he is someone that Voldemort needs right now, but that Voldemort really hates the idea that he NEEDS anyone at any time. And Lucius knows this as well as Voldemort does. That means Lucius is important now: he has the financial resources to bribe MoM officials, to make donations that enhance his personal prestige so that his views are held in high regard, to provide funds and help to any number of DE's and potential DE's and he possesses one of the few places in the UK that can be assured of safety from MoM/Auror invasion. In short, Lucius is someone who Voldemort needs. On the other hand, Lucius is a cut above the average DE recruit, and while he sincerely hates non-purebloods, he doesn't let it get in the way. During the first war, Lucius was in his mid-20's, say 25-28ish, and he was probably not in the inner circle, but in its shadow, perhaps because an older relative was there. But my guess is that he was the DE who thought the fastest after Voldemort went to GH in 1981, and he's the own who stepped into the void and took such control as was possible. I'm betting that he worked hard to make sure his own contemporaries and friends got cleared by claiming imperius curse, etc. while older DE's less likely to be led by him got sent up the river to Azkaban. So that within a few months of Voldemort's fall, Lucius was the head of a smaller group of DE's recognizing his authority. And then Voldemort comes back and don't tell me Lucius is the happiest puppy in the graveyard. This is NOT according to plan. Yes, Lucius is still a bigot and all that, but - darn it - he kind of liked being in charge and grovelling on the ground is so hard on a man's robes, just grinds the dirt right into the fabric.... So I'm thinking that Lucius is along for the VOldemort ride as far as it can take him, but that Voldemortian immortality is not his choice for a happy ending. And Voldemort knows it but he needs Lucius' and his wealth right now so he has to suck it up. But when Lucius doesn't return in good time from the MoM, Voldemort goes in person because while it's possible things went wrong, it's also possible things went right and that Lucius is listening to the prophecy for himself before handing it on or accidently destroying it. Is Bellatrix there to keep an eye on Lucius? Hard to imagine she's there for any stragetic value. How does this impact Snape and his task? Whatever else Snape is doing for the Order, I believe that one of his functions is to hold open an escape hatch for Lucius. At the proper time, he can say: "Cards on the table, Lucius: do you really want to leave the Malfoy family name in Draco's hands with an increasingly cranky and immortal Voldemort in charge? Was it really so hard having the Minister of Magic on a short leash while you swanked around the UK like a god? Okay, so you don't like muggleborns, everyone has their quirks, but do you hate them so much that you'd be willing to sacrifice everything to get rid of them? Is that a price you're willing to pay?" Because if Lucius looks the other way at a crucial time, it might make all the difference for the Order. And to make the approach, the Order doesn't have anyone else but Snape. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - now with 250MB free storage. Learn more. http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250 From spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com Thu Dec 16 18:35:00 2004 From: spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com (dungrollin) Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 18:35:00 -0000 Subject: False Alarm? Was:Re: Adults "failing" Harry (was: Themes in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119988 Annemehr: Oh, all right, I concede the point. Dumbledore's entreaty ought to have made him give it real effort even without a teacher. Alla responded: Wait, Anne. Why are you conceding? :o) I thought that you meant in your previous post that Harry did not have time to try and change his attitude DURING the lessons and before he dived in to Snape's pensieve. I mean sure during those two months Harry could have continue clearing his mind, which he did not do, but if Dungrolin suggests that he was supposed to study Occlumency on his own, I disagree. Harry does not know how to study this subject. We are not even sure that Snape was teaching it properly, how was Harry supposed to learn it on its own? Clear your mind does not equal learning Occlumency, IMO. It is just meditation exercises, which help you studying. Dungrollin: Well, of course, you're entitled to your opinion, but that's not what Dumbledore thinks. As I quoted up-thread: "...Do everything Professor Snape tells you and practise it particularly every night before sleeping so that you can close your mind to bad dreams..." Harry never did practise clearing his mind enough to know how much it would have helped him block Snape during the lessons. But DD thought it would stop the dreams, and that was what was important, wasn't it? Voldy didn't stand in front of him with a wand shouting `Legilimens!' he got at Harry through his dreams. Practising clearing his mind before he slept was what would stop the dreams; Snape seeing how easy it was to penetrate Harry's mind with the Legilimens spell was his way of checking up on how Harry was progressing. And since he wasn't practising, it's no surprise that he wasn't progressing. Harry wasn't supposed to *study* Occlumency on his own, he was supposed to *practise* it. Which he didn't do, no matter who told him how important it was. Dungrollin From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 16 18:39:56 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 18:39:56 -0000 Subject: You're in the A rmy, now. wasFalse Alarm? Was:Re: Adults "failing" Harry (in tP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119989 > Potioncat: > Oops...I'm getting hit off and on list on this one! Alla: Sorry! Did not mean to "hit" you, just wanted to disagree. :o) Sorry again. Potioncat: First off, I agree. We're told this is a war and Dumbledore is in charge of an underground organization that is fighting the enemy. And almost all of us have used the comparison of DD being a General, the others being officers or soldiers. Myself included. But, along with DD's other faults, the Order is not being run like a military organization. Where's the chain of command? Who's in charge? What training do they have? If you ask me, the Order functions like a group of friends who are pulling together for a common goal, but with very different ideas of how to accomplish and that goal, and not agreeing on who the other members should be. Alla: Well, true, some formalities are not there and true again that it could have been run better (Goes agains as to whether Dumbleore is a good general or not question, IMO) But, some of the things you are referring to, we simply do not know , because Harry does not know it. Order may as well have chain in command and someone could be possible susbstitution for Dumbledore, the order may as well endure some extra magical training, which Harry did not see. As to different ideas, well, it looks to me that they all pretty much complied with Dumbledore's ideas of how to accomplish certain goal (for example not telling Harry about the prophecy) They did do what their general told them, din't they? Potioncat: snip. I'm just grumbling that the Order is > not well run. > > Pvt. Potioncat, signing off. Alla: Sure, it could have been run better. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 16 18:51:34 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 18:51:34 -0000 Subject: False Alarm? Was:Re: Adults "failing" Harry (was: Themes in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119990 > Alla responded previously: snip. I mean sure during those two months Harry could have continue clearing his mind, which he did not do, but if Dungrolin suggests that he was supposed to study Occlumency on his own, I disagree. Harry does not know how to study this subject. We are not even sure that Snape was teaching it properly, how was Harry supposed to learn it on its own? Clear your mind does not equal learning Occlumency, IMO. It is just meditation exercises, which help you studying. >Dungrolin: Harry never did practise clearing his mind enough to know how much it would have helped him block Snape during the lessons. But DD thought it would stop the dreams, and that was what was important, wasn't it? Voldy didn't stand in front of him with a wand shouting `Legilimens!' he got at Harry through his dreams. Practising clearing his mind before he slept was what would stop the dreams; Snape seeing how easy it was to penetrate Harry's mind with the Legilimens spell was his way of checking up on how Harry was progressing. And since he wasn't practising, it's no surprise that he wasn't progressing. Harry wasn't supposed to *study* Occlumency on his own, he was supposed to *practise* it. Which he didn't do, no matter who told him how important it was. Alla: I completely agree that Harry never practiced enough, but what I am getting it is - I am not sure that practising "clearing" your mind equals "practising Occlumency" Am I being confusing? And I am not sure that Snape's only function was to check up on how Harry was progressing. If lessons were THAT simple, surely Dumbledore could have find someone else to check on Hary's progressing , who maybe knows Occlumency, but not as good at it as Snape is. I think I am going back again to speculation that something VITAL was missing in Snape's instructions. So, what was my original point of this discussion? Oh, yes Dumbledore's warning was too late and not sufficient. IMO, he could have written a letter to Harry explaining about possibility of false visions, but of course then we would not have a story. Just my opinion. From kirsty_lowson at yahoo.com Thu Dec 16 20:19:22 2004 From: kirsty_lowson at yahoo.com (Kirsty Lowson) Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 20:19:22 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] New Leader of the Order? (Was: Is DD past it (or something like that!)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041216201922.93065.qmail@web53701.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 119991 dcgmck: Of your aforementioned list, I'd like to point out that Kingsley demonstrated great presence of mind, ingenuity, and willingness to do the necessary in DD's office when Fudge and Umbridge thought they had finally gotten DD where they wanted him. Kingsley is thus demonstrably physically impressive, has that cool, deep voice that commands attention, and has demonstrated creative initiative without the attendant paranoia that hampers Moody's candidacy for leadership. Most important, he seems to be young enough to be worth some significant mileage yet to come, in contrast to McGonagall, who seems to be passing her prime, as indicated by Madame Pomfrey's outraged comments about her age when MM was shot down, also in OotP). Kirsty: Kingsley certainly seems to have enough character development to have a large(ish) role in the remaining HP books - not to mention he sounds like sex on legs ;-) Having said that, he does have his duties as an auror to fulfil - I'm doubtful as to whether he could succesfully do both this and lead the Order. Maybe a job for Gred or Forge, - just out of school (against them) so no responsibilities yet (for them). And who knows what they're developing in their sweet range...fighting the good fight has many aspects to it :-) Kirst ===== "If men are always wrong, what does that mean when he tells a woman she looks beautiful?" ___________________________________________________________ Win a castle for NYE with your mates and Yahoo! Messenger http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From eloiseherisson at aol.com Thu Dec 16 21:50:44 2004 From: eloiseherisson at aol.com (eloise_herisson) Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 21:50:44 -0000 Subject: Parenting Harry (was: Re: I don't like him much) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119992 Ba: > Thanks, Kneasy! This first hit me when Snape, in PoA, told Harry off > for sneaking into Hogsmeade, which made Harry livid; yet, when Lupin > said almost the same thing to him a moment or two later, he was > contrite. As seen through Harry's filter, Snape was wrong and Lupin > was right! This pattern has continued throughout, and it will cost > perhaps him, and certainly others, the same price that Sirius paid > when Harry "forgot" that Snape was in the Order and ran off to save > the world himself. Eloise: Although I hear Annemehr's objections to this (not quoted), it struck a chord in my mind. I've mentioned before that I think Snape has a paternal attitude towards Harry, not in the a warm, fuzzy sense, but in the sense of always watching out for whan he's in danger, always intervening always disciplining. Harry doesn't have a living parent and the "parenting" he gets comes from different people. Molly is over-protective and indulgent (as others have noted this manifests itself quite differently for her over-protectiveness for her own children). Arthur tries to do the man- to-man thing with him; Lupin seems to care deeply but at the same time stands back a little; he seems to know that Harry crosses the line of what is sensible, doesn't approve, but doesn't really enforce the discipline. Sirius, well, bless him, I don't think he has much idea of parental responsibility really; his is an emotional bond with the son of his best friend. Dumbledore is more of the wise grandparent, not terribly hands on most of the time (although a lot of this is down to Harry excluding him in the first four books which possibly makes his anger at Dumbledore failing to confide in *him* in OoP a little ironic). All of these really play the roles of the uncles, aunts, grandparents who may offer advice, may indulge, may even collude, but don't own the ultimate responsibility. It's usually down to Snape to do the less palatable side of parenting, which is a little unfortunate, given his antipathy to his charge. But aside from any character defects Snape may possess, as a parent, I can certainly identify with the frustration and the anger that arises from genuinely trying to do the best for someone and having it either ignored or thrown back in your face. Harry's hatred of Snape is not unlike the hatred which normal children experience from time to time for their parents, especially when they are trying to impose limits or when they don't understand the reasons for decision. Snape, in his own, unsympathetic way, has been trying to do right by Harry for some time. Sometimes, as many parents do, he's made mistakes and gone over the top, but Harry has failed to realise or acknowledge what he's done/tried to do for him (even his saving his life in PS/SS). I'm not much of a Harry fan either, I'm afraid. But then he *is* a teenage boy and they're not my favourite sector of humanity. They grow out of it eventually, I believe. I hope. ~Eloise From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Thu Dec 16 21:57:07 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 21:57:07 -0000 Subject: Who knew what ? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119993 Hi all! I've been pretty occupied RL-wise lately, haven't had time to come around. I came tonight to check on the latest discussions, and the "adults failing Harry" thread got me thinking about a couple of things : 1. Apart from DD, who in the Order knows about the Prophecy? Do we know for sure that *anyone* knows about Harry's future role in the VWII? 2. Who in the Order knows about Harry's dreams of the corridor? They all know about his Snake dream, but do we know that *anyone* knows about his recurrent corridor dream? 3. Many Order members know that Harry must be diligent in his Occlumency lessons. But do they know the real reason he must take them to start with? In short : do we know that DD has told *anyone* in the Order about Harry, his dreams, and his place in the future of the war? Because if he hasn't, then that would explain why nobody told Harry anything... And by the way : it seems obvious to me why DD didn't tell Harry that LV might put false things in his head, considering the way Harry reacted when he overheard Moody's comment about his being possessed by LV. Harry immediately jumped to the conclusion that he was untrustworthy and that he must distance himself from everyone who could help him. If DD told him that LV might influence his emotions and intellect, who knows what Harry might do? Leave Hogwarts maybe? And another thing I kept remembering while reading messages is that the whole point of OoP was to get LV out in the open. It was obvious that LV was very cosy in the dark, while the Order was in much trouble. It was absolutely essential that LV be forced out in the open, at almost any price. Seen that way, and as cruel as it may sound, Sirius's death might be considered a reasonable price to pay to win the prize : LV being seen by the Minister of Magic himself, in front of numerous official witnesses. Even Harry's death might have been acceptable (strategically, not emotionally) for many members of the Order. If DD didn't tell any of them how important Harry is, then he was the only one who knew that Harry almost getting killed was unreasonable a price. I must admit I haven't re-read OoP in the last couple of months, so I might be way off base. Sorry if that's the case. Del From antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com Thu Dec 16 21:58:38 2004 From: antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com (antoshachekhonte) Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 21:58:38 -0000 Subject: FILK: The Ballad of Sevi Snape Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119994 The Ballad of Sevi Snape To be sung to the tune of "The Ballad of Sweeney Todd" Attend the tale of Sevi Snape His skin was pale, and his mind opaque. He taught the children of wizard-kind How to brew potions or block others' minds. He played a role that few would take, Did Sevi Snape, The Potions Master of Hogwarts. He ran his classes underground. For fear and loathing they were renowned. And what if students all passed their OWLs? He always judged progress by volume of howls, Did Sevi, Did Sevi Snape, The Potions Master of Hogwarts. Hate those Potter boys, Sevi! Mutter something snide! Make them pay--they'll rue the day they pricked your pride.... He plays the villain like no one can: The lank dark hair and the ashen tan. In every book he's a herring red, Suspicions against him are best left unsaid 'Gainst Sevi, 'Gainst Sevi Snape The Potions Master of Hogwarts. Unmistakable, Sevi was, Sharp and bitter and tart, he was. Back of his smile, under his hat, Sevi took points at the drop of a bat. Sevi muttered, and Sevi brewed, Like decoction of slugs, he stewed. Sevi was swift, Sevi was subtle Sevi would blink, and students would scuttle. Sevi, Sevi, Sevi, Sevi, Sevi! Attend the tale of Sevi Snape. His teaching style was just short of rape. A villain's noose or a hero's crown? We won't ever know till the last book goes down 'Bout Sevi, 'Bout Sevi Snape The Potions Master of Hogwarts. Damn, that Sondheim guy's a witch when it comes to internal rhyme and syncopation. I give up! (Oh, and I hate calling Snape "Sevi"--but it worked here.) From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 16 22:06:53 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 22:06:53 -0000 Subject: Parenting Harry (was: Re: I don't like him much) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119995 Eloise: Although I hear Annemehr's objections to this (not quoted), it struck a chord in my mind. huge snip. Snape, in his own, unsympathetic way, has been trying to do right by Harry for some time. Alla: Honestly, I would probably heard you before OOP. Not after Occlumency failure, sorry! I don't believe that Snape had been trying to do right by Harry for some time. I DO believe that he may have tried to pay his debt to James in PS/SS. I do believe that he may have guarded Harry because of Dumbledore's orders. I don't agree that Snape cares in the slightest whether Harry lives or dies. I may believe though that Snape will come to realise that Harry is his best chance to see Voldemort's dead. Since I do believe that Snape wants Voldemort dead , I hope that Snape will cooperate with Harry if only for that reason. Just my opinion, of course. Alla, who hates being sick. :o) From dolis5657 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 17 00:34:30 2004 From: dolis5657 at yahoo.com (dcgmck) Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 00:34:30 -0000 Subject: Parenting Harry (was: Re: I don't like him much) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119996 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "eloise_herisson" wrote: > [snip] > Eloise: [snip] > I've mentioned before that I think Snape has a paternal attitude > towards Harry, not in the a warm, fuzzy sense, but in the sense of > always watching out for whan he's in danger, always intervening > always disciplining. > > Harry doesn't have a living parent and the "parenting" he gets comes from different people. [truly regretted snip] > All of these really play the roles of the uncles, aunts, grandparents who may offer advice, may indulge, may even collude, but don't own the ultimate responsibility. > > It's usually down to Snape to do the less palatable side of > parenting, which is a little unfortunate, given his antipathy to his charge. But aside from any character defects Snape may possess, as a parent, I can certainly identify with the frustration and the anger that arises from genuinely trying to do the best for someone and having it either ignored or thrown back in your face. Harry's hatred of Snape is not unlike the hatred which normal children experience from time to time for their parents, especially when they are trying to impose limits or when they don't understand the reasons for decision. Snape, in his own, unsympathetic way, has been trying to do right by Harry for some time. Sometimes, as many parents do, he's made mistakes and gone over the top, but Harry has failed to realise or acknowledge what he's done/tried to do for him (even his saving his life in PS/SS). > [snip] dcgmck: I confess my initial readings bought into Harry's POV and juvenile assessment of Snape, but first Alan Rickman and now you have me reconsidering. For the purposes of the epic, Harry's defiance and distrust of Snape will probably prove warranted in the long run, but from a RL perspective it is also easy to see Snape as a well- intentioned disciplinarian who has not had first-hand experience with the leavening effects of 24/7 parenting of his very own offspring, whether because he doesn't live with them or because he doesn't have any. One who has not had the opportunity and need to offer consolation or comfort to an inconsolable child facing real or imagined fears at all hours is more inclined to believe that the world can and should be lived in living shades of black and white. From snow15145 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 17 02:42:56 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 02:42:56 -0000 Subject: Does Viktor Krum become an important character? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119997 Janet Anderson (snipped): We already have Snape on the good side (in my opinion). Everything you could say about Viktor regarding the Dark Arts, and a whole lot worse, can be said (and undoubtedly has been said, to Dumbledore and others) about Snape. So if we can trust Snape (and some of us can, while at the same time thinking he needs the occasional swift kick), then we should be able to give a seventeen-year-old boy the benefit of the doubt. Snow: I would like to believe that Krum will be on the side of good but Dumbledore's reaction in GOF leaves me a bit hesitant. In the chapter, The Madness of Mr. Crouch, Harry has gone to tell Dumbledore that Crouch is in the forest talking strangely: "Said he wants to warn you said he's done something terrible he mentioned his son and Bertha Jorkins and-and Voldemort something about Voldemort getting stronger " "Indeed," said Dumbledore, and he quickened his pace " "He's not acting normally,"[ ]I left him with Victor Krum." "You did?" said Dumbledore sharply, and he began to take longer strides still " It appears, at least to me, that Dumbledore was not thrilled at the prospect of leaving Krum alone in the woods with Crouch. Snow From snow15145 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 17 03:15:35 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 03:15:35 -0000 Subject: Dumb(ledore) Like a Fox Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119998 I think we can all agree that Dumbledore has a plan given the statement made by him in OOP: "Five years ago, then, [ ] you arrived at Hogwarts, neither as happy nor as well nourished as I would have liked but as normal a boy as I could have hoped under the circumstances. Thus, far, my plan was working well. Also "I cared about you too much, [ ] I cared more for you happiness than your knowing the truth, more for your peace of mind than my plan, more for your life than the lives that might be lost if the plan failed." I'm fairly certain that Dumbledore had a masterful plan. Like all good strategists, Dumbledore would have examined every person involved in Harry's life from the moment he suspected Harry to be the prophecy child. Dumbledore orchestrated his plan according to allies and possible enemies in sheep's clothing. The first Voldy war was in full bloom with many casualties and possibly some who appeared to be killed but was cleverly removed for later use as a spy. As in Pettigrew's case, if you appear to be dead no one would suspect you. There are two persons pictured in the first Order who have not truly been accounted for: Benjy Fenwick and Caradoc Dearborn. Caradoc Dearborn vanished and Benjy copped it very similar to Pettigrew; they "only ever found bits" of Benjy compared to "a few fragments" of Peter. Peter's death was a fake why not Benjy. In fact, lets go one further and say that Benjy took Peter's place before Peter met Sirius in the street. How could Benjy appear to look like Peter? Metamorphmagus. Next is the question of rarity of a metamorphmagus but squibs are also rare and there are two of them to date that we know of. Many questions could be answered if Benjy were now playing the Peter role but as a spy for Dumbledore: (1) It would surely explain why Dumbledore was as calm as he was when Harry was distraught over Peter's escape in POA. (Unless Peter is now Benjy) (2) It would also explain the unnatural strength of character on Peter's part to question Voldemort over which wizard to use in his attempt at a new body. (Not one of the death-eaters would have been so bold as to question the wants and ways of Voldemort let alone Peter) (3) It would explain why the wimpy Peter we had believed him to be could now cut off his own hand to bring back Voldemort bodily. (I have to add that I don't believe Voldemort can be killed unless he is brought back to a solid "mortal" being therefore it was necessary to be of assistance) (4) It would explain why Pettigrew was so gentle in taking a bit of Harry's blood rather than mutilating him for it like he had just done to himself. (The recipe only asked for blood, no specific amount, and yet Peter only took a dribble) (5) It would also give credence as to why Cedric asked Harry to take his body back (Voldemort was bundled up at the time of the AK and could not actually see what had happened only heard what had (?) happened and Harry's scar was searing with pain so he didn't actually see what happened either. Cedric may look like he is dead but he may not be first there was a swishing noise and then the voice which called out the AK. As we have seen in the fight at the DOM, Dolohov was voiceless when he threw the disabling curse at Hermione. Why couldn't the swishing noise represent a silent spell?) (6) It would also explain why Sirius was taken to Azkaban rather than given the dementors kiss for killing the Potters. (Dumbledore had Sirius framed to go to Azkaban for his own protection or he may have still been suspect or too much of a liability, similar to Dumbledore keeping Sirius locked in Grimmald Place for what Dumbledore thought was his own good) (7) It would explain why the Peter in school that was described as not being in the same league as James and Sirius and hopeless at dueling appears to be a totally different character capable of outsmarting Sirius in the street with a pre-meditated plan. (Even Voldemort reminiscing in the graveyard notices that Peter appears to have been different: "Wormtail- displaying a presence of mind I would never have expected from him-") I think Dumbledore's plans and protections are quite lengthy and involve many characters. We know that Dumbledore had more than one spy, according to Fudge in The Three Broomsticks, but the only one that has been introduced openly is Snape. Snow From imamommy at sbcglobal.net Fri Dec 17 03:45:02 2004 From: imamommy at sbcglobal.net (imamommy at sbcglobal.net) Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 03:45:02 -0000 Subject: Umbridge and Harry's Temptations (was Re: False Alarm?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 119999 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > > Alla responded previously: > > snip. > > I mean sure during those two months Harry could have continue > clearing his mind, which he did not do, but if Dungrolin suggests > that he was supposed to study Occlumency on his own, I disagree. > Harry does not know how to study this subject. We are not even sure > that Snape was teaching it properly, how was Harry supposed to learn > it on its own? > > Clear your mind does not equal learning Occlumency, IMO. It is just > meditation exercises, which help you studying. > > > > >Dungrolin: > Harry never did practise clearing his mind enough to know how much > it would have helped him block Snape during the lessons. But DD > thought it would stop the dreams, and that was what was important, > wasn't it? Voldy didn't stand in front of him with a wand > shouting `Legilimens!' he got at Harry through his dreams. > Practising clearing his mind before he slept was what would > stop the dreams; Snape seeing how easy it was to penetrate > Harry's mind with the Legilimens spell was his way of checking up > on how Harry was progressing. And since he wasn't practising, > it's no surprise that he wasn't progressing. > > Harry wasn't supposed to *study* Occlumency on his own, he was > supposed to *practise* it. Which he didn't do, no matter who > told him how important it was. > > > > Alla: > > I completely agree that Harry never practiced enough, but what I am > getting it is - I am not sure that practising "clearing" your mind > equals "practising Occlumency" Am I being confusing? And I am not > sure that Snape's only function was to check up on how Harry was > progressing. If lessons were THAT simple, surely Dumbledore could > have find someone else to check on Hary's progressing , who maybe > knows Occlumency, but not as good at it as Snape is. > > I think I am going back again to speculation that something VITAL > was missing in Snape's instructions. > > So, what was my original point of this discussion? Oh, yes > Dumbledore's warning was too late and not sufficient. IMO, he could > have written a letter to Harry explaining about possibility of false > visions, but of course then we would not have a story. Just my > opinion. From dolis5657 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 17 05:13:14 2004 From: dolis5657 at yahoo.com (dcgmck) Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 05:13:14 -0000 Subject: Does Viktor Krum become an important character? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120000 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "snow15145" wrote: > > Janet Anderson (snipped): > [snip] So if we can trust Snape (and some of us can, while at the same time thinking he needs the occasional swift kick), then we should be able to give a seventeen-year-old boy the benefit of the doubt. > > > Snow: > > I would like to believe that Krum will be on the side of good but > Dumbledore's reaction in GOF leaves me a bit hesitant. > > In the chapter, The Madness of Mr. Crouch, Harry has gone to tell > Dumbledore that Crouch is in the forest talking strangely: > "Said he wants to warn you said he's done something terrible he > mentioned his son and Bertha Jorkins and-and Voldemort something > about Voldemort getting stronger " > "Indeed," said Dumbledore, and he quickened his pace " > "He's not acting normally,"[ ]I left him with Victor Krum." > "You did?" said Dumbledore sharply, and he began to take longer > strides still " > > It appears, at least to me, that Dumbledore was not thrilled at the > prospect of leaving Krum alone in the woods with Crouch. > > Snow dcgmck: At first I wondered about DD's reaction, but then it dawned on me that there might have been just as much cause for concern over leaving a seventeen-year-old alone with a powerful wizard not fully in touch with reality. DD, after all, as headmaster of the school hosting the Triwizard Tournament, is responsible for the safety of all the contestants, not just his own students, and Crouch, Sr. has a history of spelling first and asking questions later when he believes he is confronting an enemy. From foxmoth at qnet.com Fri Dec 17 05:57:09 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 05:57:09 -0000 Subject: You're in the A rmy, now. wasFalse Alarm? Was:Re: Adults "failing" Harry (in tP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120001 > Alla: > > Well, true, some formalities are not there and true again that it could have been run better (Goes agains as to whether Dumbleore is a good general or not question, IMO) > > But, some of the things you are referring to, we simply do not know , because Harry does not know it. Order may as well have chain in command and someone could be possible susbstitution for Dumbledore, the order may as well endure some extra magical training, which Harry did not see. > > As to different ideas, well, it looks to me that they all pretty much complied with Dumbledore's ideas of how to accomplish certain goal (for example not telling Harry about the prophecy) They did do what their general told them, din't they? > Pippin: They did? You mean like Mundungus skipping guard duty at Privet Drive to deal in stolen cauldrons, or Sturgis Podmore not showing up for duty either (*before* he was caught) , or Sirius contesting every order he ever got, or Molly hysterically deciding that Harry doesn't "need to know" anything? Was anybody disciplined for these things? If Dumbledore tried, would they accept his authority? The people who obey orders consistently are Arthur, Bill, McGonagall, Shacklebolt and Tonks, who are all bureaucrats and/or Aurors and trained to take orders already. Snape obeys with ill grace, but we don't know whether that's his cover or his true nature. In any case, The Order is a band of irregulars, by definition not subject to military discipline, which exists to do things that the regular forces of the wizarding world, the Aurors and the civilian bureaucracy ,can't or won't, such as teaching Harry occlumency on the sly. We don't know if any of the others have this skill at all (Lupin probably does, but he seems to be concealing it), and if they did, they wouldn't be sneaky enough to carry on teaching it under Umbridge's nose. I still say occlumency was a shot in the dark -- Snape said it himself, the usual rules did not seem to apply in this case. Voldemort was penetrating Harry's mind without eye contact and through the walls of Hogwarts, both of which were supposed to be impossible. If those things didn't stop Voldie, was there really much hope that occlumency would? The other thing is that as far as everyone knew, Harry *was* motivated. He was obviously terrified by the snake incident, so much that he wanted to bolt back to the Muggle world. What the adults didn't get is that while Harry was horrified at Voldemort being able to access his mind, he thought being able to access Voldie's mind was seriously cool. It didn't occur to him that he was being exposed to contamination either way -- while to the adults it was so obvious as not to need explaining. A grown-up's mistake. Pippin From finwitch at yahoo.com Fri Dec 17 08:26:43 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 08:26:43 -0000 Subject: False Alarm? Was:Re: Adults "failing" Harry (was: Themes in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120002 > Alla: > > I completely agree that Harry never practiced enough, but what I am > getting it is - I am not sure that practising "clearing" your mind > equals "practising Occlumency" Am I being confusing? And I am not > sure that Snape's only function was to check up on how Harry was > progressing. If lessons were THAT simple, surely Dumbledore could > have find someone else to check on Hary's progressing , who maybe > knows Occlumency, but not as good at it as Snape is. > > I think I am going back again to speculation that something VITAL > was missing in Snape's instructions. > > So, what was my original point of this discussion? Oh, yes > Dumbledore's warning was too late and not sufficient. IMO, he could > have written a letter to Harry explaining about possibility of false > visions, but of course then we would not have a story. Just my > opinion. Finwitch: I thought of something - after the fact, Dumbledore, upon assuming all the guilt, says that it is a failing of an adult (old man?) to forget what it is to be young. That, IMO, was *the* error Dumbledore did make... Easy enough, I suppose, to forget what it was like to be when he was a tenth of his current age. Because well - it's simple biology. As 15-year old boys have these hormonal surges, you know... That means that - because of his hormonal disbalance added to all other things going on - lack of sleep, blood and trusted adults that is - well... Snape who was telling Harry to clear his mind of all emotion could as well have told a stormy ocean to calm itself. Harry, being in his hormonal puberty, was simply *unable* to clear his mind. Extreme emotions ARE part of *being* in puberty, after all. We can expect adolescents to control their actions, but controlling their emotions? Not even all adults can do that, and their bodies aren't in puberty-change... AND of Snape's 'teaching' - well, he wasn't showing very good example on clearing his mind of emotions, now was he? Oh and - Hermione got her hormonal puberty in PoA (Never mind her age, statistically girls DO get a head start), and Ron in GoF - OOP was simply Harry's turn. Hopefully Harry's not getting suicidal as well. (I think that if Dumbledore *hadn't* told him of this prophecy, Harry would be, due to guilt, and because he can't go on 'being a danger to all who care for him', because he'd not see any point of continuing to live at Dursleys, because he'd want to go where his parents and godfather are - and I doubt that blood-protection does anything to prevent suicide... Harry may not have realised what the Veil was, but even if he did, I think he *would* have gone anyway if Lupin hadn't stopped him.) Finwitch From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Fri Dec 17 10:04:16 2004 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 10:04:16 -0000 Subject: Does Viktor Krum become an important character? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120003 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "snow15145" wrote: > Snow: > > I would like to believe that Krum will be on the side of good but > Dumbledore's reaction in GOF leaves me a bit hesitant. > > In the chapter, The Madness of Mr. Crouch, Harry has gone to tell > Dumbledore that Crouch is in the forest talking strangely: > "Said he wants to warn you said he's done something terrible he > mentioned his son and Bertha Jorkins and-and Voldemort something > about Voldemort getting stronger " > "Indeed," said Dumbledore, and he quickened his pace " > "He's not acting normally,"[ ]I left him with Victor Krum." > "You did?" said Dumbledore sharply, and he began to take longer > strides still " > > It appears, at least to me, that Dumbledore was not thrilled at the > prospect of leaving Krum alone in the woods with Crouch. > > Snow Hickengruendler: I think it's the other way around. When Harry told Dumbledore what happened, Dumbledore went fast because he knew that some odd things were going on (that possibly involve Voldemort), and he thought that Mr Crouch was in danger. When Harry told him that Viktor is with Crouch, he went even faster because he thought that now two lives were in danger. And Viktor is in gtrave danger. The fake Moody could just as well have killed him, too. In fact, I think the only reason why Moody hasn't killed him, was that with Viktor's death the Triwizard Tournament might have been cancelled, and Moody needed the tournament for his plan. (Yes, we all don't understand why exactly he needed the tournament instead of turning some random object into a portkey, but obviously he did ;-) ). IMO, GoF gives a clear hint on which side Viktor Krum is. He was raised and educated in Durmstrang by Karkaroff, who didn't except muggleborns and where they teach the Dark Arts. He was probably taught that muggleborns were inferior to pure-blooded wizards. And still he fell genuinely in love with Hermione, although he knew from Rita's articles, that she's a muggleborn. And that his feelings were honest and that he didn't just use her to get some informations is shown at the Second Task, when Hermione was the hostage he had to save. That shows IMO that Viktor has a lot of character strength, if he isn't influenced by all the prejudices that were taught him since he was a about eleven. Hickengruendler From finwitch at yahoo.com Fri Dec 17 10:08:39 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 10:08:39 -0000 Subject: Adults "failing" Harry (was: Themes in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120004 > Betsy: > Hopefully I've shown why I think the actions of the adults around > Harry were believable, maybe even a little bit understandable. Of > course, Dumbledore was wrong. He underestimated Harry's maturity and > his ability to handle joining the war against Voldemort. But I can > see why Dumbledore made this mistake. He loves Harry. I imagine it > would be hard to recognize exactly when the child you love is ready > to pick up a sword and walk onto the battle field. And I imagine > you'd try and delay that time for a long as you possibly could. So I > don't think this was a ham-handed attempt on Jo's part to > unnecessarily complicate OotP, but actually a natural outgrowth on > the part of the characters. Finwitch: Hmm-mm. Fore-warning is equipment. Just like Sirius considered about the DA-club. The thing is - they ARE at war. Everyone IS involved, aware or not. Those who *know* what's going on are better equipped to deal with it and to survive. The decision of not telling the kids anything simply proves to me that these wizards truly aren't much for logic. And Harry in particular *was* involved since before his birth, HAS faced Voldemort more times than the adults, so er - keeping Harry in the dark was just stupid. No one ever told him that V might feed him false visions - just that he knew of the connection and that was somehow dangerous... of course, it's easy to say that when I'm just reading the book... And what comes to Harry's emotional health - yes, Sirius is the one who should keep that as the godfather - he tries, but after 12 years with Dementors, short break and back in the house that created some of the memories he was more or less forced to dwell in for 12 years - he's not in much of a healthy emotional state himself. According to Dumbledore's interpretation of Trelawney's the first prophecy, Harry IS the one able to defeat Voldemort. Therefore, the future of both WW and MW rests upon Harry. That means that HARRY is important. This includes not just physical safety (which Dumbledore haven't been able to provide at Hogwarts) but emotional as well. After all, if Harry's emotional state goes down enough, he might not fight at all, but just be quiet and wait to die - or be more active and commit suicide. And what would that mean to Dumbledore's plans? Finwitch From ejblack at rogers.com Fri Dec 17 13:47:56 2004 From: ejblack at rogers.com (Jeanette) Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 13:47:56 -0000 Subject: New Leader of the Order? In-Reply-To: <20041216201922.93065.qmail@web53701.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120005 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Kirsty Lowson wrote: > > Kirsty: > Kingsley certainly seems to have enough character > development to have a large(ish) role in the > remaining HP books - not to mention he sounds > like sex on legs ;-) Just a stray thought: we all know Rowland has a fondness for playing with the names of characters. Now she has named a character "Kingsley" That may be an indication that the character does indeed have a larger role to play in the next books. Jeanette From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 17 15:28:03 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 15:28:03 -0000 Subject: You're in the A rmy, now. wasFalse Alarm? Was:Re: Adults "failing" Harry (in tP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120006 Alla previously : snip. As to different ideas, well, it looks to me that they all pretty much complied with Dumbledore's ideas of how to accomplish certain goal (for example not telling Harry about the prophecy) They did do what their general told them, din't they? > Pippin: They did? You mean like Mundungus skipping guard duty at Privet Drive to deal in stolen cauldrons, or Sturgis Podmore not showing up for duty either (*before* he was caught) , or Sirius contesting every order he ever got, or Molly hysterically deciding that Harry doesn't "need to know" anything? Was anybody disciplined for these things? If Dumbledore tried, would they accept his authority? Alla: Pippin, I had in mind specific example, which I quoted earlier - not telling Harry about prophecy and we KNOW that nobody told Harry about it. Even though Sirius clearly wanted to and I wish he would disobey this particular order. As to examples you quoted - I think they don't really count in the grand scheme of things. True, most of those guys are not soldiers per se, but I'd say where it really counted they obeyed Dumbleodre. Even Sirius obeyed the Orders pretty well, considering the fact just how much he hated Grimmauld place and still he stayed there, because that was Dumbledore told him to do ( another example of the general not knowing his soldiers basic needs, if you ask me). True, Sirius disobeyed the order at the end, but I cannot blame him, when he learned that Harry's life is at stake. Pippin: In any case, The Order is a band of irregulars, by definition not subject to military discipline, which exists to do things that the regular forces of the wizarding world, the Aurors and the civilian bureaucracy ,can't or won't, such as teaching Harry occlumency on the sly. We don't know if any of the others have this skill at all (Lupin probably does, but he seems to be concealing it), and if they did, they wouldn't be sneaky enough to carry on teaching it under Umbridge's nose. Alla: I am not sure I agree about Order's being "band of irregulars". Pippin: The other thing is that as far as everyone knew, Harry *was* motivated. He was obviously terrified by the snake incident, so much that he wanted to bolt back to the Muggle world. What the adults didn't get is that while Harry was horrified at Voldemort being able to access his mind, he thought being able to access Voldie's mind was seriously cool. It didn't occur to him that he was being exposed to contamination either way -- while to the adults it was so obvious as not to need explaining. A grown-up's mistake. Alla: Well, yes, Harry's being able to see Arthur's being attacked did save Arthur'a life didn't it? So, Harry's reasoning seems quite understandable to me. And here would be the ideal moment to explain to Harry that even though this vision was real, some of them ... may not be, so Harry should be on his guard. I am not quite sure why it was so obvious to adults of the Order that Harry will figure it out on his own. From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Fri Dec 17 16:07:22 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 16:07:22 -0000 Subject: Longbottoms/Lestranges/Bagman/Lockhart (was: Re: JKR's cryptic answer) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120007 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" wrote: > > > Potioncat: > > I've never associated the bubbles with the orbs, but it works. And > > we've seen something else that floats like a bubble, but is > > described as an orb: Lupin's boggart. I wouldn't think Alice would > > know his boggart, but is the bubble a prophecy orb or a full moon? > > Or both? > > Good question. > The whole subject of repetitive globes/orbs in the books was given > more attention after an off-site exchange with Lyn Mangiameli; he > thought it needed bringing up so I did (109868). And yes, Lupin's > Boggart did get a passing mention in this respect last month. > > But so far it's just a nice, neat little theory. Proving it is gonna be > something else again. > Kneasy Further thoughts resulting from a mental nudge. When the Dementor!Boggart terrorises Harry it has much the same effect on him that a real Dementor does - panic, flashbacks etc. If Lupin's Boggart really is the moon, why doesn't he show some reaction to it? He dismisses it 'almost lazily', yet he tells us that the transformations are very painful. A Moon!Boggart should induce the feelings of pain and panic that the real moon does, though it probably wouldn't have the power to cause a full transformation. If, on the other hand Lupin's greatest fear is that information inside a prophecy orb may get out.... what reaction would you expect? Kneasy From annemehr at yahoo.com Fri Dec 17 16:10:13 2004 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 16:10:13 -0000 Subject: Does Viktor Krum become an important character? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120008 > > Snow: > > > > I would like to believe that Krum will be on the side of good but > > Dumbledore's reaction in GOF leaves me a bit hesitant. > > It appears, at least to me, that Dumbledore was not thrilled at the > > prospect of leaving Krum alone in the woods with Crouch. > > dcgmck: > At first I wondered about DD's reaction, but then it dawned on me > that there might have been just as much cause for concern over > leaving a seventeen-year-old alone with a powerful wizard not fully > in touch with reality. DD, after all, as headmaster of the school > hosting the Triwizard Tournament, is responsible for the safety of > all the contestants, not just his own students, and Crouch, Sr. has a > history of spelling first and asking questions later when he believes > he is confronting an enemy. Annemehr: Not only that, but Crouch was obviously escaping from something. Dumbledore was concerned for the safety of both of them, and with good reason -- when he arrived at the scene, one was stunned and the other, as it turned out, was murdered. I also think Krum is all right. He may have been Karkarov's favorite boy for the glory he might bring to him, but as we saw at the end of GoF, Krum did not have any respect for his headmaster as a person. Annemehr From willsonkmom at msn.com Fri Dec 17 16:29:22 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 16:29:22 -0000 Subject: Longbottoms/Lestranges/Bagman/Lockhart (was: Re: JKR's cryptic answer) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120009 Kneasy wrote: snip > If, on the other hand Lupin's greatest fear is that information inside a prophecy orb may get out.... what reaction would you expect? > Potioncat: And what "gets out" of the orb when he casts the spell? A cockroach. Somehow, although I still don't "get" it, that makes more sense with a prophecy orb than with a moon. From a_b_desert_king at hotmail.com Fri Dec 17 18:55:51 2004 From: a_b_desert_king at hotmail.com (a_b_desert_king) Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 18:55:51 -0000 Subject: Themes in OotP (was Re: Angry Harry in HBP?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120010 > SSSusan: > A nice analysis, Rebecca. I especially like the points you're making > here at the end -- that it's just ILLOGICAL for no adult to have sat > Harry down over this issue of visions. Heck, DD could have *written* > to Harry about it, even if he feared being in the same room with > him. A letter from DD would have gotten Harry's attention, I'm sure > of it. > > A lot of OotP, I think, found the adults in Harry's life flat-out > *uncomfortable* with things pertaining to Harry and VW2. They knew > more than he; they weren't comfortable, to varying degrees, with > telling him things; they weren't sure how to reconcile his having > proven himself to be mature & capable with his young age & their fear > for his future. It doesn't make their behaviors -- particularly > their avoidance behaviors -- right or excusable, but I do think they > may be fairly realistic behaviors for many people. They know some > awful stuff; they're worried; they don't want to burden the poor > tyke. Maybe they don't trust themselves to sit down & just chat with > him because if he asks the wrong kind of question, they're going to > feel bad about being evasive. > > It was WRONG to have behaved this way -- they could have at least > TRIED spending time with him & talking, to see how it would go, but > they didn't. Now, any adult who's been dreading a conversation with > a child or a question from a child will probably identify with their > feelings, but at least a couple of them should have risen above it > and showed Harry some real support and willingness to talk about at > least some of the difficult stuff. Or to be open about what couldn't > be talked about. > snip Which brings to mind in PoA when Arthur Weasley makes a special effort to tell Harry about Sirius 'being after Harry' even though everyone from the MoM to Molly think Harry isn't old enough to know the truth. And what did Harry do when he heard 'the truth' finally? He confronted Sirius in the shrieking shack and possibly put himself and his friends at risk (if Sirius had indeed been after him). This would make me wonder if it was wise to tell Harry any details - he's shown us that he doesn't take direction very well when he's told NOT to do something (which is exactly what he would be told in OOtP). Heather From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Fri Dec 17 20:08:38 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 20:08:38 -0000 Subject: Longbottoms/Lestranges/Bagman/Lockhart (was: Re: JKR's cryptic answer) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120011 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > > Potioncat: > And what "gets out" of the orb when he casts the spell? A > cockroach. Somehow, although I still don't "get" it, that makes more > sense with a prophecy orb than with a moon. Why a cockroach? IIRC the Riddikulus! spell changes something fearful just enough to turn it into a joke - Snape remains Snape but is dressed as Gran Longbottom; the Mummy's wrappings unravel; the spider loses it's legs; a Banshee with laryngitis and so on. Following tradition you'd expect the moon would turn into a smiling moon-faced man or a wheel of green cheese. An orb would become - who knows? Depends what's in it. If a cockroach is the joke, what's the original fear? Logically it should be something like a giant preying mantis. Closest thing in canon is a Blast-ended Skrewt, but I thought Hagrid developed those experimentally. Oh, dear. It's time to fire up those grey cells again. Kneasy From fkilc at yahoo.com Fri Dec 17 13:06:22 2004 From: fkilc at yahoo.com (fkilc) Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 13:06:22 -0000 Subject: Who knew what ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120012 Del: > 2. Who in the Order knows about Harry's dreams of the corridor? They > all know about his Snake dream, but do we know that *anyone* knows > about his recurrent corridor dream? > Well, Snape most likely did, since he became quite furious at Harry for "dreaming" that he was running down the corridor (remember that Harry was quite surprised at Snape's anger because he seemed more angry than when Harry was able to protect himself and get flashes of Snape's memory). Knowing that Snape can "put two and two together like only Snape can", I would be surprised that Snape didn't figure it out. To me, the question would then be "did Snape report this ?" --Francois From flamingstarchows at att.net Fri Dec 17 20:59:50 2004 From: flamingstarchows at att.net (texaschow) Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 20:59:50 -0000 Subject: Harry following directions (was:Themes in OotP (was Re: Angry Harry in HBP?)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120013 > > SSSusan: > > A nice analysis, Rebecca. I especially like the points you're > making > > here at the end -- that it's just ILLOGICAL for no adult to have > sat > > Harry down over this issue of visions. Heck, DD could have > *written* > > to Harry about it, even if he feared being in the same room with > > him. A letter from DD would have gotten Harry's attention, I'm > sure > > of it. > > > > snip snip >> Heather wrote: > Which brings to mind in PoA when Arthur Weasley makes a special > effort to tell Harry about Sirius 'being after Harry' even though > everyone from the MoM to Molly think Harry isn't old enough to know > the truth. > > And what did Harry do when he heard 'the truth' finally? He > confronted Sirius in the shrieking shack and possibly put himself > and his friends at risk (if Sirius had indeed been after him). > > This would make me wonder if it was wise to tell Harry any details - > he's shown us that he doesn't take direction very well when he's > told NOT to do something (which is exactly what he would be told in > OOtP). ~Cathy~ now (out of lurkdom) But what was Harry supposed to do in the Shrieking Shack? He thought a giant dog had dragged his best friend underground to eat him. He *had* to try and save him. He did not know it was Sirius until he was all the way there and Ron told him it was a trap. At that point, it was a little late, and there really wasn't anywhere to run (not that Harry is the running type). They were already at risk by then, so they had to try and fight. Wouldn't it be kind of a boring story if Harry and every character in it was perfect and always did the right thing? From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Fri Dec 17 21:00:57 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 13:00:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] You're in the A rmy, now. wasFalse Alarm? Was:Re: Adults "failing" Harry (in tP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041217210057.69111.qmail@web53101.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120014 --- pippin_999 wrote: > I still say occlumency was a shot in the dark -- Snape said it > himself, the usual rules did not seem to apply in this case. > Voldemort was penetrating Harry's mind without eye contact and > through the walls of Hogwarts, both of which were supposed to > be impossible. If those things didn't stop Voldie, was there really > much hope that occlumency would? See, I've always assumed that the whole point was less for Harry to learn occlumency than to get him to do the whole empty-your-mind thing before bed every night. According to what Snape tells us about how occlumency works, you've got to be awake and on your toes to successfully fog your thoughts so a legilimans like Voldemort can't get into it. How Harry can do this while asleep is not explained. Granted that the normal rules don't see to apply, as Snape put it, it's still a little confusing if the point was really for Harry to learn this magical art. > Pippin: > The other thing is that as far as everyone knew, Harry *was* > motivated. He was obviously terrified by the snake incident, so > much that he wanted to bolt back to the Muggle world. What the > adults didn't get is that while Harry was horrified at Voldemort > being able to access his mind, he thought being able to access > Voldie's mind was seriously cool. It didn't occur to him that he > was being exposed to contamination either way -- while to the > adults it was so obvious as not to need explaining. A grown-up's > mistake. Snape's comment that since the Arthur vision Voldemort was now aware that he and Harry were sharing thoughts seems to have gone right past Harry like a stiff breeze. I think Pippin's right; it didn't occur to the adults that Harry wouldn't connect the dots. Just like McGonagall got impatient with him when he kept getting detentions from Umbridge and gave him another one so he'd get a clue faster. This is my biggest beef with OOTP-Harry: not so much the ANGER or the self-pity but the inability to connect the dots and figure out that the guy who tried to kill him in the graveyard should be repelled at all costs from his mind and that he should listen to what people tell him (see paragraph above for an example). You think if Hermione had known that Voldemort was now aware of the mind connection she wouldn't have dragged Harry to Snape's office every week for occlumency lessons? Darn right she would have. Hermione has her faults but an inability to see the big picture is not one of them. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 250MB free storage. Do more. Manage less. http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250 From gbannister10 at aol.com Fri Dec 17 21:09:20 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 21:09:20 -0000 Subject: Themes in OotP (was Re: Angry Harry in HBP?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120015 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "a_b_desert_king" wrote: Heather: > And what did Harry do when he heard 'the truth' finally? He > confronted Sirius in the shrieking shack and possibly put himself > and his friends at risk (if Sirius had indeed been after him). Geoff: With respect, I think you are forgetting the story line of POA. Harry did /not/ set out to confront Sirius. The Trio were leaving Hagrid's when they heard what they thought was Buckbeak being executed. At that point, Scabbers managed to break free of Ron's grip and was chased by Crookshanks; then, after Ron recaptures the rat, "something was bounding towards them out of the dark - an enormous, pale-eyed, jet-black dog" which knocks Harry over and drags Ron away into the Whomping Willow. They get into the tunnel and arrive at what Hermione correctly recognises as the Shrieking Shack. Please note, that so far, they do not know anything about the dog except that it has dragged Ron off. It is at this point that they catch up with Ron who is on the floor and it is /only/ at this point that they first discover that the dog is Sirius Black in Animagus form. (Story line from POA "Professor Trelawney's Prediction"/"Cat, Rat and Dog" pp.243-49 UK edition) As I said previously, Harry does not set out to confront Sirius. He and the others set out to rescue Ron who appears to be in serious danger. They do not know it is Sirius until he "decloaks" in the Shrieking Shack. I am sorry but I believe that your analysis of this event is totally wrong. Geoff http://www.aspectsofexmoor.com From tzakis1225 at netzero.com Fri Dec 17 22:35:31 2004 From: tzakis1225 at netzero.com (demetra1225) Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 22:35:31 -0000 Subject: I don't like him much In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120016 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Barry Arrowsmith wrote: > There's recently been a clutch of threads expressing concern over Harry, worrying about his emotions both past and future and about the failings of the adults in the books for daring to be out of step with the disobedient, lying little scrote. [snip] Demetra: I actually generally like Harry as a character, but he often grated on my nerves in OotP. Yes, I agree with everyone who has argued that Harry was simply acting like a typical teenage boy. I simply had *my* typical response to teenage boys ? I wanted to smack him upside the head. What I don't understand about the `adults failed Harry because they didn't give him enough information' argument is this ? If Harry is a typical teenaged boy, why would anyone think that giving him information would help? My experience with teenagers is that facts are conveniently ignored when said facts come in direct conflict with the teenager's desires. If teenaged boys actually paid any heed to the information they are given they wouldn't drink and drive. They wouldn't have sex without using a condom. They wouldn't experiment with drugs, they would "just say no". Yep, Harry behaved like a typical teenager. IMHO, additional information wouldn't have made a hill of beans of difference. Harry made a conscious decision to ignore Hermione, Dumbledore, Sirius and Lupin who all told him that it was important to work hard on Occlumency. He made a choice, and he chose poorly. Kneasy again: What DD feared is coming to pass - Harry is starting to believe his own publicity. Being Harry Potter is sufficient justification in his eyes for doing, thinking, almost anything. If things turn out well, the plaudits rain down, when it's "50 points to Gryffindor!" (even though what happened was usually a combination of luck and outside influences) his self-regard inflates another notch. Despite DD's fears and his attempts to prevent them coming to fruition, young Potter is regarded as something special in the WW - and he knows it. [snip] Now Demetra: I agree that to some extent Harry seemed to be starting to believe his own publicity, at least at the beginning of OotP. But what did DD actually do to prevent those fears from coming into fruition, besides placing Harry with the Dursleys? Harry is frequently caught out of bounds, yet the only time I can recall him being punished for it is when McGonnagall did in PS/SS. He clearly has impulsive tendencies, but DD has never cautioned him that one of these times his luck may run out. It seems to me that this is DD's big error ? the tacit approval of Harry's recklessness. Yes the outcomes have been in Harry's favor, at least until OotP, but if Harry had ever been reprimanded in the past, would he have been as likely to rush off to the MoM? Demetra (who thinks that the person who wrote "The Little Drummer Boy" could teach Snape and Vernon Dursley a thing or two about sadistic behavior) From javalorum at yahoo.ca Fri Dec 17 22:19:54 2004 From: javalorum at yahoo.ca (javalorum) Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 22:19:54 -0000 Subject: Teaching methods (was Umbridge and Harry's Temptations) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120017 I only looked into Ootp regarding teaching methods at Hogwards. Does anyone else think this school has pretty low standard of teaching? Every class, the teacher just shows up, and says "read the books" (Umbridge, Trelawney) or "read my instructions and do it" (Snape). It seems Binns is the only one that talks to the entire class during his class. I know Umbridge is not meant to be a good teacher. But of all the classes shown in detail, none has much teacher's involvement. At most they'll do is walk around and answer individual questions, as if the entire school day is a big lab or tutor class. I kind of wonder how much the students can really get out of there. Is magic that different from normal science and arts, that all students need is memorization (for theory) and intuition (for practice)? Snape never explains what Occlumency is, how it works and how you're supposed to block it ("clear your mind" just doesn't seem enough). In his own class he never explains what each ingredient is suppose to do, and how they react to each other either. Even university level chemistry is not this hard. Other teachers probably don't do it that way, but then again, in book 5, with the exception of Grubbly-Plank and Hagrid, we don't really see them in action (teaching) much. Java > > Alla: > > > > I completely agree that Harry never practiced enough, but what I am > > getting it is - I am not sure that practising "clearing" your mind > > equals "practising Occlumency" Am I being confusing? And I am not > > sure that Snape's only function was to check up on how Harry was > > progressing. If lessons were THAT simple, surely Dumbledore could > > have find someone else to check on Hary's progressing , who maybe > > knows Occlumency, but not as good at it as Snape is. > > > > I think I am going back again to speculation that something VITAL > > was missing in Snape's instructions. > > > > So, what was my original point of this discussion? Oh, yes > > Dumbledore's warning was too late and not sufficient. IMO, he could > > have written a letter to Harry explaining about possibility of > false > > visions, but of course then we would not have a story. Just my > > opinion. From tombadgerlock at freesurf.fr Fri Dec 17 22:33:13 2004 From: tombadgerlock at freesurf.fr (totorivers) Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 22:33:13 -0000 Subject: False Alarm? Was:Re: Adults "failing" Harry (was: Themes in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120018 > Dungrollin: > > Well, of course, you're entitled to your opinion, but that's > not what Dumbledore thinks. As I quoted up-thread: > > "...Do everything Professor Snape tells you and practise it > particularly every night before sleeping so that you can close your > mind to bad dreams..." > > Harry never did practise clearing his mind enough to know how much > it would have helped him block Snape during the lessons. But DD > thought it would stop the dreams, and that was what was important, > wasn't it? > > Harry wasn't supposed to *study* Occlumency on his own, he was > supposed to *practise* it. Which he didn't do, no matter who > told him how important it was. Toto: While what you say may seem true enough, the problem is that Snape didn't tell Harry anything. Dumbledore wanted Harry to practice exercises. Snape gave him none. Tell me, would you be able to do anything if someone just yell at you to "clear your mind"? How do you clear your mind anyway? By thinking about one thing? By not thinking at all? How do you achieve that? Snape should have given Harry small exercises to build up his occlumency practice, and never did. Harry *couldn't* obey Dumbledore, as Snape didn't tell him to do anything substantial. Toto From tombadgerlock at freesurf.fr Fri Dec 17 22:50:55 2004 From: tombadgerlock at freesurf.fr (totorivers) Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 22:50:55 -0000 Subject: Parenting Harry (was: Re: I don't like him much) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120019 > Eloise: > Although I hear Annemehr's objections to this (not quoted), it > struck a chord in my mind. > > huge snip. > > Snape, in his own, unsympathetic way, has been trying to do > right by Harry for some time. > Alla: > Honestly, I would probably heard you before OOP. Not after > Occlumency failure, sorry! Toto: I totally agree with Alla here. When has Snape cared if Harry lived in a satisfying way? In ps, I could see Snape trying to save Harry as a point, just saying *I am better than you* to James, or maybe just because you do not stand back when someone is in danger. Trying to save someone else do not mean you are good, nor does it mean you aren't bad. It just mean you are an active person. I think. In Cos, would sacking Harry would have been any good to him? In Poa, couldn't he have listened to Sirius? In my opinion, Snape is a very, very unstable man, with a very big ego. Not really an interesting person at all, but a dangerous one. For allies, that is. Toto From tombadgerlock at freesurf.fr Fri Dec 17 22:58:20 2004 From: tombadgerlock at freesurf.fr (totorivers) Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 22:58:20 -0000 Subject: Parenting Harry (was: Re: I don't like him much) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120020 > dcgmck: > For the purposes of the epic, Harry's defiance and distrust of > Snape will probably prove warranted in the long run, but from a > RL perspective it is also easy to see Snape as a well-intentioned > disciplinarian who has not had first-hand experience with the > leavening effects of 24/7 parenting of his very own offspring, > whether because he doesn't live with them or because he doesn't > have any. Toto: Once again I must say I am confused. In OotP, Harry got on my nerves. Why? Because he wasn't thinking, and was angry at people without realising he had the power to change that, if he just talked, something he never does. But Snape, a well intentioned disciplinarian? There is limits a disciplinarian does not cross. One of them is sacking the child, sending him to an abusing household, and so on. Snape tried to get Harry expulsed. *And* he was happy about it. He tried to kill Sirius Black in the most painful way imaginable without hearing what Harry had to tell. And so on. *Maybe* Snape believes himself in the role of the disciplinarian, but in that case, it's just an excuse for his hate to sift through. Toto From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Sat Dec 18 00:22:51 2004 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 00:22:51 -0000 Subject: Teaching methods (was Umbridge and Harry's Temptations) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120021 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "javalorum" wrote: > > > I only looked into Ootp regarding teaching methods at Hogwards. Does > anyone else think this school has pretty low standard of teaching? > Every class, the teacher just shows up, and says "read the books" > (Umbridge, Trelawney) or "read my instructions and do it" (Snape). It > seems Binns is the only one that talks to the entire class during his > class. I know Umbridge is not meant to be a good teacher. Hickengruendler: And she's not the only one ;-). Really, IMO, you have picked up the worst teachers of them all (except Lockhart, who comes second only after Umbridge). Snape and maybe even Binns are highly competent in the knowledge of their subject, but they are horrible in bringing the message across. Trelawney is bad, too, but I think that's more because of the subject. She does encourage them to work together and to discuss the problems, though, which is not bad, and puts her as a teacher above Umbridge or Lockhart or even Binns in my book. There are better teachers: Hagrid tells them a lot about the different creatures and how to handle them. Of course he either overestimates the class or underestimates the monsters, but otherwise his teaching methods are not bad. He tells them exactly what they have to know about the beasts. Grubbly-Plank is even better than him. Flitwick gave them proper instructions in the scene where they learned the Wingardium Leviosa spell. Sprout tells them how to handle the Mandrakes, Lupin explains them very well how to defeat the boggart, the fake Moody shows them the Unforgivables and even how to fight the Imperius Curse (and I can only guess that he had to do this because that's what the real Moody wanted to do as well, and he couldn't risk to blow his cover), McGonagall is also very good in explaining them. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat Dec 18 02:17:12 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 02:17:12 -0000 Subject: I don't like him much In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120022 > Demetra: I actually generally like Harry as a character, but he often grated on my nerves in OotP. Yes, I agree with everyone who has argued that Harry was simply acting like a typical teenage boy. I simply had *my* typical response to teenage boys ? I wanted to smack him upside the head. Alla: LOL! Yes, sometimes teenage boys do invoke such reaction, absolutely. :o) Demetra: What I don't understand about the `adults failed Harry because they didn't give him enough information' argument is this ? If Harry is a typical teenaged boy, why would anyone think that giving him information would help? My experience with teenagers is that facts are conveniently ignored when said facts come in direct conflict with the teenager's desires. snip. Yep, Harry behaved like a typical teenager. IMHO, additional information wouldn't have made a hill of beans of difference. Harry made a conscious decision to ignore Hermione, Dumbledore, Sirius and Lupin who all told him that it was important to work hard on Occlumency. He made a choice, and he chose poorly. Alla: Well, that part I disagree with. I tend to think that additional information would have made A LOT of difference, I AM of opinion that Harry did act as typical teenage boy, but he is not stupid (in my opinion, at least) and he is not evil (also in my opinion) Dumbledore did NOT give him a possibility to make informed choice. He lacked necessary information to choose wisely, IMO. Are you saying that if Harry would have been given an information that Voldie may plant false visions in his head, he would have not practised "clearing his mind"? I mean, I tend to think that it would have even motivated him to trust Snape. Of course, maybe I have too high opinion of Harry's intelligence. I mean, sure it is quite possible that information would not have helped, since Harry would not been able to overcome his mistrust of Snape anyway, but we will never know, will we? From vmonte at yahoo.com Sat Dec 18 03:35:35 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 03:35:35 -0000 Subject: Questions Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120024 Some Harry Potter Questions I Want Answers to: 1. Has Lupin ever killed anyone while in werewolf form? 2. Was Lupin a werewolf on the night that Lily and James were killed? 3. Is the voice that Harry believes to be his father telling his mother to run (dementor scene in PoA) really James? Or, is it another case of mistaken identity? 4. Will Voldemort get his hands on a time turner? 5. Will Harry travel back in time and be mistaken for James? 6. Is there something in Snape's worst memory that Snape does not want Dumbledore to know? 7. Did Sirius's prank against Snape happen on the night of the school exams (Snape's penseive memory)? 8. Who were Lily's best friends? 9. Whose brain attacked Ron? (Flamel? Godric?) 10. Will Harry eventually be able to do magic without a wand? From imamommy at sbcglobal.net Sat Dec 18 04:10:13 2004 From: imamommy at sbcglobal.net (imamommy at sbcglobal.net) Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 04:10:13 -0000 Subject: Umbridge and Harry's Temptations (was Re: False Alarm?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120025 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, imamommy at s... wrote: > > >Dungrolin: > > Harry never did practise clearing his mind enough to know how much > > it would have helped him block Snape during the lessons. But DD > > thought it would stop the dreams, and that was what was important, > > wasn't it? Voldy didn't stand in front of him with a wand > > shouting `Legilimens!' he got at Harry through his dreams. > > Practising clearing his mind before he slept was what would > > stop the dreams; Snape seeing how easy it was to penetrate > > Harry's mind with the Legilimens spell was his way of checking up > > on how Harry was progressing. And since he wasn't practising, > > it's no surprise that he wasn't progressing. > > > > Harry wasn't supposed to *study* Occlumency on his own, he was > > supposed to *practise* it. Which he didn't do, no matter who > > told him how important it was. > > > > > > > > Alla: > > > > I completely agree that Harry never practiced enough, but what I am > > getting it is - I am not sure that practising "clearing" your mind > > equals "practising Occlumency" Am I being confusing? And I am not > > sure that Snape's only function was to check up on how Harry was > > progressing. If lessons were THAT simple, surely Dumbledore could > > have find someone else to check on Hary's progressing , who maybe > > knows Occlumency, but not as good at it as Snape is. > > > > I think I am going back again to speculation that something VITAL > > was missing in Snape's instructions. > > > > So, what was my original point of this discussion? Oh, yes > > Dumbledore's warning was too late and not sufficient. IMO, he could > > have written a letter to Harry explaining about possibility of > false > > visions, but of course then we would not have a story. Just my > > opinion. imamommy: (I think Yahoomort ate my other reply!) Well, I agree with Alla that something was midding from Snape's instruction, namely, er, instruction. The only direction he gave Harry, IIRC, was to clear his mind. He never told Harry how to fight against him, he never told him how to lock him out, just clear your mind. So, IMO, Snape never really *taught* Harry Occlumency, he just attacked, over and over again. Why this could be is a subject for another post. With regards to DD sending Harry a letter: I think he might have done, except that Umbridge was quite likely to find something put in writing. I don't even think it could have gotten from the Headmaster's office to Harry's dorm without interference. A self- destruct message (or one that says, chuck this in the fire as soon as you're done) would only work if Harry was the first person to read it. IMO, DD knows that Umbridge is watching him and Harry with extremely close scrutiny, and has sufficient concern that she would intercept any message he tries to send. Especially since Harry and the Weasleys only just manage to get away the night Arthur is attacked. Perhaps, deep down, DD didn't want to give Harry this information, due to the reasons he gave Harry at the end of OoP (ie he cared too much for Harry), and Umbridge happened to allow him to excuse himself, but it amounts to the same thing. DD did make a mistake to not do *something*, but it may not have been easy to get this information to Harry. Also, I wanted to address a secondary theme of the books, that of a personal struggle with temptation. Harry has temptations; albeit they may not be the usual ones you might associate with a teenage boy ;P In PoA, he is *tempted* to not fight the dementors because they give him the only chance he has to hear his mother. He has to fight this temptation in order to learn to cast a patronus. He does so, IMO, because he doesn't want to pass out around dementors, he doesn't want to lose anymore quidditch matches, and he has an understanding teacher helping give him support. He has a similar temptation in Oop; to allow the visions to continue. On one hand, he knows he's supposed to shut them out, and everyone from DD to Hermione to Sirius has reemphasized this. But he feels tempted, he wants to find out what's behind the door, and he knows his vision of Arthur saved the man's life, plus his (dubious) instruction is coming from a man Harry distrusts deeply. Hence, he doesn't put the same level of effort into Occlumency as he did into patronus lessons. Interestingly, learning the patronus charm saved Sirius' life; failure to learn occlumency may have cost it. Resisting temptation and learning to do the responsible thing is a skill many adults struggle with, and learning to do this is part of Harry's growing up process. He will continue to struggle with it, but hopefully this lesson will stick with him. imamommy who is grateful no one is reading seven volumes on what I was like as a teenager From imamommy at sbcglobal.net Sat Dec 18 04:59:52 2004 From: imamommy at sbcglobal.net (imamommy at sbcglobal.net) Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 04:59:52 -0000 Subject: Adults "failing" Harry (was: Themes in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120026 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "finwitch" wrote: snip > > Finwitch: > > Hmm-mm. Fore-warning is equipment. Just like Sirius considered about > the DA-club. The thing is - they ARE at war. Everyone IS involved, > aware or not. Those who *know* what's going on are better equipped to > deal with it and to survive. The decision of not telling the kids > anything simply proves to me that these wizards truly aren't much for > logic. > > And Harry in particular *was* involved since before his birth, HAS > faced Voldemort more times than the adults, so er - keeping Harry in > the dark was just stupid. No one ever told him that V might feed him > false visions - just that he knew of the connection and that was > somehow dangerous... of course, it's easy to say that when I'm just > reading the book... > > And what comes to Harry's emotional health - yes, Sirius is the one > who should keep that as the godfather - he tries, but after 12 years > with Dementors, short break and back in the house that created some of > the memories he was more or less forced to dwell in for 12 years - > he's not in much of a healthy emotional state himself. > > Finwitch imamommy: one of the things that really bothered me was the lack of "hang time" Harry and Sirius had together. Why, during the month of August and two weeks at winter break, did the two of them have, what, at most three conversations? I think this was why Sirius' death didn't have quite the impact on me that it should have. I was told by the narration that Harry and his godfather had gotten close, but I never actually saw (or read) it happen. Honestly, all that time for Harry to probe Sirius, to ask about James, to bake Christmas cookies together, whatever, and it doesn't seem like they spend any time alone. It seems like Sirius would have been the best person to pass Harryinformation, with or without DD's permission, and yet the two *never* talk. Daggone uncommunicative men! If the story were about "Harriet" and her godmother, you can bet it would be a very different story! imamommy (not saying all men are uncommuicative, just these two in particular) From imamommy at sbcglobal.net Sat Dec 18 05:10:13 2004 From: imamommy at sbcglobal.net (imamommy at sbcglobal.net) Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 05:10:13 -0000 Subject: Lupin's Boggart (was RE: Longbottoms/Lestranges/Bagman/Lockhart) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120027 Kneasy: If Lupin's Boggart really is the moon, why doesn't he show some reaction to it? He dismisses it 'almost lazily', yet he tells us that the transformations are very painful. A Moon!Boggart should induce the feelings of pain and panic that the real moon does, though it probably wouldn't have the power to cause a full transformation. > > > > Potioncat: > > And what "gets out" of the orb when he casts the spell? A > > cockroach. Somehow, although I still don't "get" it, that makes more > > sense with a prophecy orb than with a moon. > Kneasy: > Why a cockroach? > IIRC the Riddikulus! spell changes something fearful just enough to > turn it into a joke - Snape remains Snape but is dressed as Gran > Longbottom; the Mummy's wrappings unravel; the spider loses it's legs; > a Banshee with laryngitis and so on. Following tradition you'd expect the > moon would turn into a smiling moon-faced man or a wheel of green > cheese. An orb would become - who knows? Depends what's in it. > > If a cockroach is the joke, what's the original fear? Logically it should > be something like a giant preying mantis. Closest thing in canon is a > Blast-ended Skrewt, but I thought Hagrid developed those experimentally. > > Oh, dear. It's time to fire up those grey cells again. > > Kneasy imamommy Eww, cockroach is enough of an original fear; they give me the willies! I think, in answer to Kneasy's question about why Lupin reacts to his boggart!moon, or boggart!orb, or whatever it is, is that he has come to terms with his fear. He is familiar with it, expects it, and has learned how to deal with it. Whether or not it is an orb or a moon, it is still his greatest fear, and he still reacts lazily to it. I have no idea what the cockroach could mean, sorry. From stevejjen at earthlink.net Sat Dec 18 05:31:42 2004 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 05:31:42 -0000 Subject: Possession: Taking it Further In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120028 I'm still thinking about your post, Anne, and had a few more thoughts to add. Annemehr: > * * * * * > `You flatter me,' said Dumbledore calmly. `Voldemort had powers I > will never have.' > `Only because you're too ? well - *noble* to use them.' > [PS/SS ch. 1] > Furthermore, perhaps the power of possession itself is one of > those that Dumbledore has, but is too noble to use. This suggests > scenes of Harry receiving anti-possession lessons with Dumbledore > over the summer, evoking parallels, perhaps, to the way Occlumency > lessons ought to have gone. Jen: What powers does Dumbledore possess that he is "too noble" to use? One seems to be the AK, from the scene in the DOM with Voldemort, when LV realizes DD is not attempting to kill him. Certainly DD must also have a working knowledge of the other Unforgiveables as well. Legilimency and Occlumency are practiced by LV and Snape, but DD is not 'too noble' to use Legilimency on Kreacher. It seems like accessing someone's mind without permission is pretty invasive, but DD has no qualms using this power in an emergency. Dumbledore can make himself invisible, like LV also demonstrated in the MOM. But using it to wander around Hogwarts isn't like using it to sneak up on someone to kill him/her. Frankly, I can't think of any power other than possession that we see Voldemort use and not Dumbledore. And possibly the AK, although just because DD didn't AK Voldemort in the MOM doesn't mean he's *never* used the killing curse. Pretty hard to get through all those wars and the defeat of Grindelwald without killing someone. Annemehr: > * * * * * > `You can speak Parseltongue, Harry,' said Dumbledore calmly, `because > Lord Voldemort [...] can speak Parseltongue. Unless I'm much > mistaken, he transferred some of his own powers to you the night he > gave you that scar.' > [CoS ch. 18] > * * * * * > > I think it's very likely that Harry already has the power of > possession, that he's had it since the attack at Godric's Hollow. I > believe JKR was hinting in the quote above that Parseltongue was not > the only power Harry received from Voldemort that night, and yet we > have never had any clear indication of what others there might be. Jen: It's so hard to tell from the story if a vague quote like the one above holds a treasure trove of information, or is merely a point to move the story along. It's like that old medical joke, "it could be nothing, it could be a brain tumor." Like Annemehr said, there seems to be more than one power that LV transferred to Harry at GH. But will we ever find out what they were, is this even crucial to the story, or is this where we suspend analytical thought and take it on faith?!? But if Harry did get some other important powers, it seems like there would be hints by now. The only possibilty I can think of is the wandless magic Harry does occasionally, but we've never seen LV do that. Harry recognizes and Dumbledore agrees that Harry couldn't defeat LV in a duel (in OOTP after DD & LV duel in the MOM). Dumbledore makes it clear that Harry's heart saved him, not any special ability he has to repel Voldemort. Presumably Voldemort could not reside in anyone with strong positive emtotions for very long. I think I'm talking myself into the possibilty that we won't actually see Harry use any other powers he inherited from Voldemort, even though it's an unsatisfying thought. Jen, still grappling with the possession idea and thinking, "it could be nothing, it could be the key to the whole story." From stevejjen at earthlink.net Sat Dec 18 05:52:23 2004 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 05:52:23 -0000 Subject: Longbottoms/Lestranges/Bagman/Lockhart (was: Re: JKR's cryptic answer) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120029 Kneasy: > If Lupin's Boggart really is the moon, why doesn't he show some > reaction to it? He dismisses it 'almost lazily', yet he tells us that > the transformations are very painful. A Moon!Boggart should > induce the feelings of pain and panic that the real moon does, > though it probably wouldn't have the power to cause a full > transformation. > > If, on the other hand Lupin's greatest fear is that information inside > a prophecy orb may get out.... what reaction would you expect? Jen: My first thought is there's a huge error in the movie-that-must- not-be-named if Lupin's boggart is not the moon. That's all I can say about that ;). As to why Lupin feels no effects and Harry faints in the face of the Boggart!Dementor, I'd say it's all about practice. Lupin tells Harry in POA the boggart is 'the closest thing to a dementor' they can practice with. That makes it sound like a boggart comes in second to a real dementor for it's power. We saw in GOF what a little bit of practice can do against a boggart. Harry produces a Patronus in the maze, much more easily than in OOTP when he's facing two real dementors. And after he produces the stag and the dementor 'trips', Harry performs the Riddikulus spell quickly and with little effot, much like Lupin in POA. Jen From lexical74 at yahoo.com Sat Dec 18 06:12:01 2004 From: lexical74 at yahoo.com (Brian Brinkman) Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 06:12:01 -0000 Subject: New Leader of the Order? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120030 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jeanette" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Kirsty Lowson > wrote: > > > > > Kirsty: > > Kingsley certainly seems to have enough character > > development to have a large(ish) role in the > > remaining HP books - not to mention he sounds > > like sex on legs ;-) > > Just a stray thought: we all know Rowland has a fondness for > playing with the names of characters. Now she has named a > character "Kingsley" That may be an indication that the character > does indeed have a larger role to play in the next books. > > Jeanette JKR certainly gave Kingsley enough attention in OOTP for a new, apparently secondary character. The most interesting line of his related to your discussion occurs when all are surprised that Harry didn't get named a prefect. On the idea of naming Harry prefect, Kingsley says something like, "It's what I'd have done." Now that's an interesting line because, on the surface, it's quite presumptious. For Kingsley's line to be taken seriously, it would need to be likely that he could be in a position to grant such an honor. I think the line is certainly an argument for your ideas. Brian From elanorpam at yahoo.com.br Sat Dec 18 01:16:18 2004 From: elanorpam at yahoo.com.br (Paula "Elanor Pam") Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 23:16:18 -0200 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Teaching methods (was Umbridge and Harry's Temptations) References: Message-ID: <001c01c4e49f$2f84ecb0$0301010a@home> No: HPFGUIDX 120031 From: "hickengruendler" > the fake Moody shows them the Unforgivables and even how to > fight the Imperius Curse (and I can only guess that he had to do this > because that's what the real Moody wanted to do as well, and he > couldn't risk to blow his cover) I've tried to stay away from this topic, but had to comment on this little part. You see, after I first read GoF (after knowing Moody had actually been Crouch Jr.), I thought that the Imperius Class scene was just showing how much C. Jr. despised having been imperiused for so many years - the fact that a kid managed to throw it off practically in the first try, even if it was Harry Potter, filled him with some kind of twisted glee/pride, like most students at school felt when Fred and George ran away, even those who weren't close to them. Kinda reminds me of a relative cheering and clapping his hands to a completely unknown guy in a party, because the guy was doing some mind-boggling footwork while dancing. I'm not sure if I'm making sense... this "putting into words" thing is HARD. Elanor Pam From lea_petra at yahoo.com Sat Dec 18 10:07:24 2004 From: lea_petra at yahoo.com (Mari Lea) Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 02:07:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: Questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041218100724.90282.qmail@web60001.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120032 --- vmonte wrote: > > Some Harry Potter Questions I Want Answers for: > > 1. Has Lupin ever killed anyone while in werewolf > form? Mari: I have thought about that too. It is a very good possiblity. It would be intersting to find out. The wolfsbane potion is recent, but we are not told how recent. There could be other ways that Lupin could control himself or control how much interaction with others he has during that time. But I don't think anything could be fool-proof, even the potion. > 2. Was Lupin a werewolf on the night that Lily and > James were killed? Mari: According to http://aa.usno.navy.mil/cgi-bin/aa_moonphases.pl?year=1981&ZZZ=END or http://tinyurl.com/4cmz6 That date did not have a full moon, the moon was heading to the first quarter. Of course that is if the books stays true to reality. > 9. Whose brain attacked Ron? (Flamel? Godric?) Mari: I've thought those brains were like the Matrix in Dr. Who. Where the Time Lords would record their minds, before they finally died. So if that is the case here. It could have been anyone's brain, including Slytherin. ===== "I thought you said we were done doing things the stupid way." --Puss-in-Boots Shrek 2 From heos at virgilio.it Sat Dec 18 13:07:01 2004 From: heos at virgilio.it (chrusotoxos) Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 13:07:01 -0000 Subject: A child is, by definition, WRONG Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120033 Hi everybody! I've just been reading the series about "Adult failing Harry" and I think that that title goes the wrong way round. As Rebecca said, > Harry is not 9 years old. He should have the brains to > realize that there are *reasons* for him being kept in > the dark, especially by a number of people he's known > and trusted for some time. Some children I know (and adults too, apparently) liked Book 5 less than the others because everything becomes so messy, and Sirius dies. But I say, Hello, and welcome to Grownup's world! A world in which stupid, rash actions have real consequences, a world in which death can be a consequence. In my opinion, Harry has always acted the little hero, never trusting the adults surrounding him. Everybody said that the Philosopher's stone was well protected? Na, don't believe it! Let's go and rescue it! And the same goes for the Chamber (why, why going down that thing with Lockart!, when there are so many good teachers around them?) and for most of the things Harry says and does. In a way I admire him, he's so brave and all, but at the same time I'm like, Calm down, adults know what is good for you! And Book 5 is a messy book because Harry is still a child, but the world around him has become adult - and dangerous. If Harry had trusted Dumbledore, Lupin, Sirius, Molly Weasley, even Snape - if he had thought of Snape before breaking in in Umbridge's office, then Sirius would still be alive. He played the hero and it didn't work. Children can be cute, but they are not always right!! Therefore, what happened is not Dumbledore's fault (even if he said so himself), and most definitely is not Snape's, who is already playing dirty on several fronts and cannot afford to be thrown off balance by a stupid kid who is not even trying to learn. I really believe that in Book 6, Harry will grow up, and the greater signal would be trusting Snape (and for us to know *why* people trust him, wooooooow!). From spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com Sat Dec 18 13:54:55 2004 From: spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com (dungrollin) Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 13:54:55 -0000 Subject: Yet another defense of Snape's Occlumency lessons (long) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120034 Okay, I know that the Occlumency lessons have been gone over a million times before, but since I wasn't really sure what I thought about it, I've gone through OotP again, looking for the bits about Occlumency, and have come out of it on Snape's side. I'm trying to be as even-handed as I can be, and trying to make this canon-based rather than opinion-based. So here we go, let's read it again: Lesson 1: Snape *does* give Harry a damn good reason for learning Occlumency: "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 realised that he might be able to access your thoughts and feelings in return ?" "And he might try and make me do things?" asked Harry. "*Sir*?" he added hurriedly. "He might," said Snape... Now, presumably, there are any number of ways that Voldy could make Harry do things ? and any number of things that he could make Harry do. The Order may not even know at this point that it would be possible for Voldy to send false visions to Harry. Being more specific and giving examples when you only have DD's suspicions could backfire if Voldy tried something that they didn't mention, as Harry would assume it was real. Better to just teach him Occlumency and stop all of it. Anyway, on the first attempt, Snape says: "You may use your wand to attempt to disarm me, or defend yourself in any other way you can think of". Snape then breaks into Harry's mind. That was the first test to see Harry's natural aptitude. Then Snape explains a bit more "You must remain focused. Repel me with your brain and you will not need to resort to your wand." Harry gets stroppy: "I'm trying [...] but you're not telling me how!" "Manners, Potter," said Snape dangerously. "Now, I want you to close your eyes. [...] Clear your mind, Potter, [...] Let go of all emotion [...] You're not doing it Potter ... you will need more discipline than this ... focus, now ..." Harry does try, but it doesn't work, Snape breaks into his memories again. Snape says that Harry isn't trying, Harry insists that he is, but Snape says: "Then prove it! Master yourself! [...] Control your anger, discipline your mind!" At the end of the lesson, he says "You are to rid your mind of all emotion every night before sleep; empty it, make it blank and calm, you understand?" Is that not an explanation of what Harry's supposed to do? Weeks Later: Apart from a brief mention that his scar was prickling more and more and he felt lurches of emotion unconnected with what was going on, and Ron's suggestion that Snape was deliberately making it easier for Harry's mind to be invaded by Voldy, the next mention we have of Harry practising is after the Quidditch match against Hufflepuff in which Ron performs dismally. Harry goes to bed, remembering Umbridge's delight at how badly Gryffindor were playing. "After a few minutes, however, he remembered that he was supposed to be emptying his mind of all emotion before he slept, as Snape kept instructing him at the end of every Occlumency lesson. He tried for a moment or two, but the thought of Snape on top of memories of Umbridge merely increased his sense of grumbling resentment and he found himself focusing instead on how much he loathed the pair of them." Then Harry has another dream about the corridor. Two days later (the match was on a Saturday) is the Monday that the Quibbler interview comes out, and the day after that, Harry goes to bed and "fell asleep almost at once" (i.e. without clearing his mind of emotion) whereupon he has the dream about Rookwood. A couple of weeks after this (and after a suggestion from Hermione that Harry should make more effort with Occlumency) Snape sees the memory of the dream of Rookwood. Then Harry uses Protego! And breaks into Snape's memories. Snape says "Well, Potter ... that was certainly an improvement [...] I don't remember telling you to use a Shield Charm ... but there is no doubt that it was effective ..." Then Snape tries again, and Harry's back in the DoM corridor, and finally gets through the door. And Snape is furious. "You are not working hard enough!" Then they're interrupted by Umbridge sacking Trelawny. After this we have the discovery of the DA and DD leaves ? but not before telling Harry that he must study Occlumency as hard as he can, and reminding him to close his mind. The day after this, Harry dreams himself all the way into the prophecy room, and the day after that: "Harry spent the whole of the next day dreading what Snape was going to say if he found out how much further into the Department of Mysteries Harry had penetrated during this last dream. With a surge of guilt he realised that he had not practised Occlumency once since their last lesson: there had been too much going on since Dumbledore had left; he was sure he would not have been able to empty his mind even if he had tried. He doubted, however, whether Snape would accept that excuse." Snape never does find out though, because that's the lesson interrupted by Draco, and Harry's nosiness puts a stop to it all. My take on this: I find Harry's insistence on dwelling on his anger peculiar. Fear is something I find much more difficult to control than anger ? possibly because external influences are the cause of the feeling, but anger (although also dependent on external influences) is more dependent upon my mood, and attitude, and I can master that. In this, Harry has reactions opposite to mine, (he easily overcomes his fear, but not his anger) so perhaps that's why I have little sympathy for his difficulties. It would be interesting if the people who are on his side in this debate react similarly to him ? have difficulty getting over anger, but less difficulty getting over fear. I'm not sure how posters can argue that Snape hasn't told Harry how to practise. Is it that bit in the first lesson, where Harry says `you're not telling me how'? Because immediately after that Snape *does* explain about ridding one's mind of emotion. I'll just repeat a bit: "With a surge of guilt he realised that he had not practised Occlumency once since their last lesson" ? clearing his mind of emotion at night *is* practising Occlumency (which some have suggested is not the case.) If clearing his mind before sleep is impossible for Harry because the instructions that Snape has given him are inadequate, then Harry is doubly negligent in not telling Snape that he doesn't understand how to do it. There's actually no evidence that Harry has difficulty in clearing his mind and practising Occlumency (at least at the beginning of the lessons in January), there's just one sentence (in April): "With a surge of guilt he realised that he had not practised Occlumency once since their last lesson: there had been too much going on since Dumbledore had left; he was sure he would not have been able to empty his mind even if he had tried." Now, I read that as meaning he hadn't practised because there had been so much going on that he forgot, and then the last bit about being sure he couldn't have if he had tried sounds like a bit of an excuse, to me. It might have been true, but he didn't try, so we'll never know. And then there's Harry's confession at the end: "But I didn't [...] I didn't practise, I didn't bother, I could've stopped myself having those dreams, Hermione kept telling me to do it, if I had he'd never have been able to show me where to go..." And why does Harry insist that he'll never forgive Snape? Because of Snape's sneer when Harry told him `He's got Padfoot at the place where it's hidden!' Because Snape goaded Sirius and implied Sirius was a coward. No resentment about Snape not teaching him Occlumency *properly*, Harry takes the blame for not learning himself. However, after Harry takes the blame, he starts trying to blame Snape for everything, he does a U-turn and says Snape stopped the lessons, and accuses him of making it worse, making it easier for Voldy. DD doesn't reply to the accusations, but says he trusts Snape, and implies that the reason Snape stopped the lessons was that he couldn't overcome his feelings about James. - No mention of Snape not teaching Occlumency properly *while the lessons were going on*. My biggest problem with the idea that Snape didn't teach Harry Occlumency properly, is Snape's motivation. Why on earth should he deliberately omit vital instructions? Nobody (IIRC) seems to have suggested a plausible motivation ? but I doubt that any will go as far as postulating ESE!Snape either. On the other hand, Snape does have good and plausible motivations for teaching Harry properly: 1. It's Snape's job to find out what Voldy and the DEs are up to, not Harry's ? let's stop him getting ideas above his station. 2. Voldy may well be able to get at DD through Harry unless Harry is able to shut him out of his mind. And Snape is loyal to DD. 3. Voldy may well be able to make Harry do things, (putting Harry in danger) unless Harry is able to shut him out of his mind. And Harry is the only one with the chance of beating Voldy for good. The basic problem was one of trust, and Harry's lack of it in others. Phineas Nigellus summed it up nicely: "Have you never paused, while feeling hard-done-by, to note that following Dumbeldore's orders has never yet led you into harm?" Of course mistakes were made, but the biggie was that Harry should have known the full prophecy at the end of GoF, then he'd have known that Voldy might try to lure him to the DoM. That would have prevented a lot of problems. So don't blame it all on Snape, particularly when DD and Harry have both accepted the blame for their various mistakes. Dungrollin From foxmoth at qnet.com Sat Dec 18 14:07:51 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 14:07:51 -0000 Subject: Lupin's Boggart (was RE: Longbottoms/Lestranges/Bagman/Lockhart) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120035 > imamommy > > Eww, cockroach is enough of an original fear; they give me the > willies! > > I think, in answer to Kneasy's question about why Lupin reacts to his boggart!moon, or boggart!orb, or whatever it is, is that he has come to terms with his fear. He is familiar with it, expects it, and has learned how to deal with it. > > Whether or not it is an orb or a moon, it is still his greatest fear, and he still reacts lazily to it. I have no idea what the cockroach could mean, sorry.< Pippin: You hit the nail on the head in your first sentence, IMO. The cockroach is another form of his great fear, that he will be revealed as the loathsome thing he dreads becoming. Lupin's riddikulus failed. Pippin pleased to have come up with an explanation that works whether Lupin is ESE! or not From foxmoth at qnet.com Sat Dec 18 15:20:23 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 15:20:23 -0000 Subject: You're in the A rmy, now. wasFalse Alarm? Was:Re: Adults "failing" Harry (in tP) In-Reply-To: <20041217210057.69111.qmail@web53101.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120036 responding to posts on this thread out of order: I've never been in the military, and will gladly accept correction from someone who has, but would any regular army in its right mind want a chronic rebel like Sirius or an incorrigible thief like Dung? They'd have washed out in basic, seems to me. I've never heard of a regular army where the soldiers get to decide which orders are important. The first thing Sun Tzu did, when he accepted the challenge of turning the Emperor's harem into an army, was have the chief concubine killed for disobedience. Magda: > Snape's comment that since the Arthur vision Voldemort was now aware that he and Harry were sharing thoughts seems to have gone right past Harry like a stiff breeze. > This is my biggest beef with OOTP-Harry: not so much the ANGER or the self-pity but the inability to connect the dots and figure out that the guy who tried to kill him in the graveyard should be repelled at all costs from his mind and that he should listen to what people tell him < Pippin: Having established that Harry has become a rebellious teenager, Rowling couldn't very well make him back off a self-destructive habit because someone in authority told him to. It wouldn't have been realistic, or dramatically satisfying. It *had* to lead to disaster. Now that it has, Harry can realistically move on -- otherwise we'd have been stuck with rebellious Harry till he grew out of it naturally, and we'd never be done in seven books. Alla: >Well, yes, Harry's being able to see Arthur's being attacked did save Arthur's life didn't it? So, Harry's reasoning seems quite understandable to me. And here would be the ideal moment to explain to Harry that even though this vision was real, some of them ... may not be, so Harry should be on his guard. I am not quite sure why it was so obvious to adults of the Order that Harry will figure it out on his own.< Pippin: IIRC, Harry never told any of the adults that he saw Arthur's rescue as a rationale for letting the dreams continue. He certainly didn't tell Snape and Sirius that he'd been dreaming about that corridor for months. Harry had every right to be pleased with himself for acting promptly and correctly in an emergency, and Arthur and Molly were right to be grateful. But... He said himself : "But if Voldemort really wants to kill you, you don't stand a chance," OOP ch 21. It would have been easy enough for the snake to rip through an artery or inject enough venom to kill Arthur on the spot. Harry only got the opportunity to rescue Arthur because Voldemort *wanted* him to have it. I think Harry realized that subconsciously, and that's why he never brought up Arthur's rescue with the adults as a reason the dreams should continue. At some level, he *knew* he was rationalizing. Pippin From quigonginger at yahoo.com Sat Dec 18 15:44:52 2004 From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger) Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 15:44:52 -0000 Subject: Lupin's boggart (was Longbottoms/Lestranges/Bagman/Lockhart) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120037 Kneasy wrote: > When the Dementor!Boggart terrorises Harry it has much the same > effect on him that a real Dementor does - panic, flashbacks etc. > > If Lupin's Boggart really is the moon, why doesn't he show some > reaction to it? He dismisses it 'almost lazily', yet he tells us that > the transformations are very painful. A Moon!Boggart should > induce the feelings of pain and panic that the real moon does, > though it probably wouldn't have the power to cause a full > transformation. (snip) Ginger: Just a guess here, but maybe it is because the effects of the Dementors are psychological, whereas the moon's are physical (to a werewolf, anyway). Harry felt the same way he would have in the presence of a dementor, but Lupin didn't have the same physical change as the moon would have had on him. It's like if you showed me a rubber snake, I'd jump on the nearest object (even if it was you) and scream my lungs out, whereas, if you fired a gun with blanks at me, it wouldn't kill me. If I knew they were blanks, I wouldn't even flinch, except as a physical reaction to the noise. The rubber snake would still leave me clawing at the ceiling tiles even if I knew it was rubber. It could be that Lupin's calmness was a cover for a deep desire to howl, scratch his ear with his hind leg, and give himself a doggie bath. Cuz he can. Ginger, who once heard a song explaining why dogs lick themselves as they do. The answer being "cuz he can". I'd go on, but we're in mixed company. From stevejjen at earthlink.net Sat Dec 18 15:52:09 2004 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 15:52:09 -0000 Subject: Lupin's Boggart (was RE: Longbottoms/Lestranges/Bagman/Lockhart) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120038 > Pippin: > You hit the nail on the head in your first sentence, IMO. The > cockroach is another form of his great fear, that he will be > revealed as the loathsome thing he dreads becoming. Lupin's > riddikulus failed. > > Pippin > pleased to have come up with an explanation that works whether > Lupin is ESE! or not Jen: This one sounds like JKR's sense of humor to me--if it turns into a cockroach, you can step on it and be done with it. So unlike the moon, Lupin would have complete power over a cockroach's destiny ;). From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat Dec 18 16:43:08 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 16:43:08 -0000 Subject: You're in the A rmy, now. wasFalse Alarm? Was:Re: Adults "failing" Harry (in tP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120039 > Pippin: > IIRC, Harry never told any of the adults that he saw Arthur's > rescue as a rationale for letting the dreams continue. snip. Alla: "Harry's heart was pumping fast again. None of this added up. But why does professor Dumbledore want to stop it?" he asked abruptly. "I don't like it much, but it's been useful, hasn't it? I mean I saw that snake attack Mr. Weasley and if I hadn't, professor Dumbledore wouldn't have been able to save him, would he? Sir ?" ? OOP, p.531. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat Dec 18 17:10:17 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 17:10:17 -0000 Subject: Yet another defense of Snape's Occlumency lessons (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120040 Dungrolin: Okay, I know that the Occlumency lessons have been gone over a million times before, but since I wasn't really sure what I thought about it, I've gone through OotP again, looking for the bits about Occlumency, and have come out of it on Snape's side. I'm trying to be as even-handed as I can be, and trying to make this canon-based rather than opinion-based. So here we go, let's read it again: Lesson 1: Snape *does* give Harry a damn good reason for learning Occlumency: "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 realised that he might be able to access your thoughts and feelings in return ?" "And he might try and make me do things?" asked Harry. "*Sir*?" he added hurriedly. "He might," said Snape... Now, presumably, there are any number of ways that Voldy could make Harry do things ? and any number of things that he could make Harry do. The Order may not even know at this point that it would be possible for Voldy to send false visions to Harry. Being more specific and giving examples when you only have DD's suspicions could backfire if Voldy tried something that they didn't mention, as Harry would assume it was real. Better to just teach him Occlumency and stop all of it. Anyway, on the first attempt, Snape says: "You may use your wand to attempt to disarm me, or defend yourself in any other way you can think of". Snape then breaks into Harry's mind. That was the first test to see Harry's natural aptitude. Then Snape explains a bit more "You must remain focused. Repel me with your brain and you will not need to resort to your wand." > Harry gets stroppy: "I'm trying [...] but you're not telling >me how!" "Manners, Potter," said Snape dangerously. "Now, I want you to close your eyes. [...] Clear your mind, Potter, [...] Let go of all emotion [...] You're not doing it Potter ... you will need more discipline than this ... focus, now ..." Harry does try, but it doesn't work, Snape breaks into his memories again. Snape says that Harry isn't trying, Harry insists that he is, but Snape says: "Then prove it! Master yourself! [...] Control your anger, discipline your mind!" At the end of the lesson, he says "You are to rid your mind of all emotion every night before sleep; empty it, make it blank and calm, you understand?" Is that not an explanation of what Harry's supposed to do? Alla: Oh, Dungrolin. Great post, but you drew me in the Occlumency debate again. So, if anybody asks, it is your entire fault :o) I am just kidding of course. That said let's proceed. I am sorry to say but after going through Occlumency pages again, even only after the first lesson, I came out of it being even more on Harry's side. First, let me say it first Harry did not practice. He did not. No question about it. It was Harry's mistake. I am arguing though that Snape's lessons gave Harry almost no help and a lot of harm. In fact, I was having flashbacks to their first potion lesson, where (in my opinion only) Snape went out of his way to make Harry hate him. Let's look at your description of the first lesson. I hope you don't mind that I add some quotations to it, because the picture you drew looks a bit Snape - sided to me. :o) So, before Harry has to come to Snape's office, Harry has no idea why he has to learn Occlumency, right? "And why does Professor Dumbledore think I need it, sir?" said Harry, looking directly into Snape's dark, cold eyes and wondering whether he would answer. Snape looked back at him for a moment and then said it contemptuously, "Surely even you could have worked that out by now, Potter? The Dark Lord is highly skilled at legilimency-"? OOP, p.530, paperback I find this quote to be weird. Why would Snape assume that Harry would already know anything about Legilimency? I guess, he was just being his usual nasty self. Anyways, Harry is trying to figure out why he has to learn it; Snape is telling him about connection between him and Voldie. But I argued it earlier ? it is an old news for Harry, expect the fact that connection strengthened for some reason. "Harry's heart was pumping fast again. None of this added up. But why does professor Dumbledore want to stop it?" he asked abruptly. "I don't like it much, but it's been useful, hasn't it? I mean I saw that snake attack Mr. Weasley and if I hadn't, professor Dumbledore wouldn't have been able to save him, would he? Sir ?" ? OOP, p.531. By the way, Pippin argued that Harry found the connection to be cool; I think this quote clearly shows that Harry did not like it, but only thought that it could save lives. Anyways, back on track Before your quote about "make me do things" one more thing happens in their conversation. Harry continues to ask questions about Arthur's vision "How come I saw through the snake's eyes if it's Voldemort's thoughts I am sharing?" "Do not say the dark Lord's name!" spat Snape" "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"- p.532 Now, my very first reaction to this part was something along the line "how dare you, Snape, Harry earned the right to call Voldie whatever name he wants" It is possible that Voldemort's name makes Dark Mark to react in some way, I will concede, but until I know that for sure, I choose to think that Snape is simply jealous of Harry who is brave enough to do what an "extremely powerful wizard Dumbledore" does call Voldemort by his real name. If I am correct, are you saying that teacher who is jealous of his student will be able to teach such student properly? Granted this is just speculation, but it is canon based speculation. True, Snape tells Harry to clear his mind, but again he does not tell him HOW to do it. No breathing exercises, no nothing. I read it differently than you do. I don't think it is sufficient. I know I would not have found such instructions to be sufficient if I was given them for meditation and I am twice as old as Harry is. Snape does not tell Harry how to get rid of his anger at all. Instead he gets angry too. Good way of learning by example, Snape. :o) "Harry stood up again, his heart thumping wildly as though he had just seen Cedric dead in the graver yard. Snape looked paler than usual, and angrier though not nearly as angry as Harry was. "I ? am ? making ? an- effort," he said through clenched teeth." "I told you to empty yourself of emotion!" "Yeah? Well, I am finding that hard at the moment," Harry snarled. Instead of telling Harry to breath, to relax, I don't know, do something that might HELP Harry, Snape becomes hysterical himself (in my opinion only) "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 that easily ? weak people, in other words, they stand no chance against their powers! He will penetrate your mind with absurd ease, Potter!" "I am not weak, "said Harry in low voice, fury now pumping through him so that eh thought he might attack Snape in a moment... "Then prove it! Master yourself!" spat Snape. "Control your anger, discipline your mind! We shall try again! Get ready now! Legilimens!" ? p.536 Snape did not "said" that last quote, he "spat" it. Again, I think he became hysterical. I also find this quote to be very hypocritical, since Snape, IMO is the person who can easily let his emotions take charge of him. Dungrolin: huge snip > My take on this: I find Harry's insistence on dwelling on his anger peculiar. Fear is something I find much more difficult to control than anger ? possibly because external influences are the cause of the feeling, but anger (although also dependent on external influences) is more dependent upon my mood, and attitude, and I can master that. In this, Harry has reactions opposite to mine, (he easily overcomes his fear, but not his anger) so perhaps that's why I have little sympathy for his difficulties. It would be interesting if the people who are on his side in this debate react similarly to him ? have difficulty getting over anger, but less difficulty getting over fear. Alla: No, Dungrolin, I usually have more trouble overcoming my nervousness than anger, I just think that Snape did nothing to help Harry get rid of his as I tried to show, therefore I sympathise with Harry. Dungrolin: > I'm not sure how posters can argue that Snape hasn't told > Harry how to practise. Is it that bit in the first lesson, where > Harry says `you're not telling me how'? Because > immediately after that Snape *does* explain about ridding one's > mind of emotion. Alla: NO, he does not, not in my opinion, he just say empty your mind of th emotion he does not say how to do it. > Dungrolin: And why does Harry insist that he'll never forgive Snape? Because of Snape's sneer when Harry told him `He's got Padfoot at the place where it's hidden!' Because Snape goaded Sirius and implied Sirius was a coward. No resentment about Snape not teaching him Occlumency *properly*, Harry takes the blame for not learning himself. However, after Harry takes the blame, he starts trying to blame Snape for everything, he does a U-turn and says Snape stopped the lessons, and accuses him of making it worse, making it easier for Voldy. DD doesn't reply to the accusations, but says he trusts Snape, and implies that the reason Snape stopped the lessons was that he couldn't overcome his feelings about James. - No mention of Snape not teaching Occlumency properly *while the lessons were going on*. Alla: Nope, blaming him for Sirius death is only aprt of the problem as you said yourself, Harry also tells Dumbledore that he felt worse after the lessons and he INDEED felt worse. Remember this? "... Harry, are you sure you're all right?" For Harry just run both his hands hard over his forehead as though trying to iron it. "yeah... fine.. he said, lowering his hands, which were trembling. "I just feel a bit... I don't like Occlumency much..." "I expect anyone would feel shaky if they 'd had their mind attacked over and over again," said Hermione sympathetically" - p.540 And this: "He took deep breaths, willing himself not to vomit all over Ron. ... Harry nodded without any conviction and slumped back on his pillows, aching all over from having fallen to the floor so often that evening, his scar still pricking painfully. He could not help feeling that his first foray i8nto occlumency had weakened his mind's resistance rather than strenthening it, and he wondered, with a feeling of great trepidiation, what ahd happened to make Lord Voldemort the happiest he had been in fourteen years" - p.542. Here is my question to you. If indeed feeling worse after the lesson is unavolidable side effect, which we have no proof of, why, oh why did Snape not WARNED Harry that he WILL feel worse? Don't you think it would help harry to trust Snape a bit more? To me this is a great proof of Snape being a sadist towards Harry. If he knew how Harry would feel, but did nothing about it, or at least told Harry to take it easy for this day, then yes, he IS responsible in my opinion. Dungrolin: > My biggest problem with the idea that Snape didn't teach Harry > Occlumency properly, is Snape's motivation. Why on earth should > he deliberately omit vital instructions? Nobody (IIRC) seems to > have suggested a plausible motivation ? but I doubt that any will > go as far as postulating ESE!Snape either. Alla: Eh? Why not? For the record, I don't believe in ESE! Snape, but quite strong case can be put together in favor of ESE!Snape, I think. Actually, I think I agree with Lupinlore, I don't think that Snape will deliberately betray the Order, but he may let hsi emotions rile up again and by accidentdo somethign which will put Order in danger. If only to make Harry's suspicions about Snape be correct even for a short perioud of time. Dungrolin: snip. >> So don't blame it all on Snape, particularly when DD and Harry > have both accepted the blame for their various mistakes. > Alla: Sorry, but may I continue blame A LOT of it on Snape, please? :o) But don't worry I blame Dumbledore too and even Harry,although to lesser extent. P.S. I want to apologise. I know that my post could have been a little less fragmental, but I cannot come up with the idea of how to make it better right now. If you found anything to be not clear, please feel free to ask me to clarify. :o) From hippievanlady at yahoo.com Sat Dec 18 16:30:07 2004 From: hippievanlady at yahoo.com (hippievanlady) Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 16:30:07 -0000 Subject: Did Fred and George mark themselves? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120041 I'm wondering if Fred and George marked themselves to be Voldemort's first Weasley victims. In Sorcerer's Stone (page 194) they get into trouble for bewitching snowballs to follow and hit Professor Quirrell on the back of his turban. When re-reading that book subsequently, that passage made me laugh that they were actually hitting Voldemort in the face. I didn't give it much thought until after attending a party this week. The host gave chocolate frogs as party favors. Mine came with a Quirinus Quirrell card in it. The image they chose for the front of the card was of the twins throwing the snowballs and hitting a pathetic looking Quirrell. It does seem that is the kind of thing that Voldemort might take personal. Catherine From heos at virgilio.it Sat Dec 18 13:45:35 2004 From: heos at virgilio.it (chrusotoxos) Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 13:45:35 -0000 Subject: Questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120042 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "vmonte" wrote: > > Some Harry Potter Questions I Want Answers to: > > 1. Has Lupin ever killed anyone while in werewolf form? According to me, no. Lupin talks profusely about his problems as a werewolf, and I'm sure we could have seen the shadow of a regret if it had been there. The closer he came was when he almost murdered baby Snape. And, we know that the Wolfsbane was not available when he was at Hogwarts, but it was probably invented not long afterwards, so... But this point will be important - you don't create a werewolf to let him sit in a chair. :)) > 2. Was Lupin a werewolf on the night that Lily and James were > killed? No again. He was suspected, remember? Therefore, he had to be in his human form to be able to go to Voldemort and betray the Potters. > 3. Is the voice that Harry believes to be his father telling his > mother to run (dementor scene in PoA) really James? Or, is it > another case of mistaken identity? It is. Lupin is sure of that, and he would know how things happened from Dumbledore. And who else could have been? > 4. Will Voldemort get his hands on a time turner? Time-turners are overrated. > 5. Will Harry travel back in time and be mistaken for James? No. It's apparently difficult enough to be himself. And, he couldn't fool people who really knew James well. > 6. Is there something in Snape's worst memory that Snape does > not want Dumbledore to know? No. Dumbledore had seen it all when Snape was a student. > 7. Did Sirius's prank against Snape happen on the night of the > school exams (Snape's penseive memory)? I really don't see Snape trust Sirius's information after the events of that day, but miracles will never cease... > 8. Who were Lily's best friends? Had she any? Shouldn't we know about them by now? > 9. Whose brain attacked Ron? (Flamel? Godric?) They wouldn't use such valuable things for experiments, imo. And how they were able to keep Godric's brain from the Middleages? > 10. Will Harry eventually be able to do magic without a wand? No. JKR said that real magic always requires a wand. Ok, here is my guess. Now answer me this, it's obsessing me: did Lucius teach Snape all those drawling tones and silky voices? The self-assurances, the feline grace? Was he trained that way in order to fight as a Death Eater? Are they friends? Chrusotoxos From adesahafford at wmconnect.com Sat Dec 18 13:45:22 2004 From: adesahafford at wmconnect.com (adesahafford at wmconnect.com) Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 08:45:22 EST Subject: You're in the Army, now. wasFalse Alarm? Was:Re: Adults "failing" Harry (in Message-ID: <77.3b1b6c8d.2ef58e72@wmconnect.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120043 Magda: > Snape's comment that since the Arthur vision Voldemort was now aware that he and Harry were sharing thoughts seems to have gone right past Harry like a stiff breeze. I think Pippin's right; it didn't occur to the adults that Harry wouldn't connect the dots. Just like McGonagall got impatient with him when he kept getting detentions from Umbridge and gave him another one so he'd get a clue faster. < Adesa: But that's as much an adult's mistake as Harry's. Why on *earth* would detention help if a dozen of them hadn't already?! McGonagall didn't understand that, rather than think, "Maybe I should think about this another way," Harry's response to detention was, "Man, is she a b****. I'll show her I can take her on." In recalling my own teen years, I think JKR's version of Harry is *much* more in tune with reality. Magda: > This is my biggest beef with OOTP-Harry: not so much the ANGER or the self-pity but the inability to connect the dots and figure out that the guy who tried to kill him in the graveyard should be repelled at all costs from his mind and that he should listen to what people tell him (see paragraph above for an example). You think if Hermione had known that Voldemort was now aware of the mind connection she wouldn't have dragged Harry to Snape's office every week for occlumency lessons? Darn right she would have. Hermione has her faults but an inability to see the big picture is not one of them. < Adesa: First of all, I find Harry's inability to see the big picture as part of his personality, not a flaw in the plot or a weakness in JKR's writing. Good Lord, I'm 33 and still need to be hit over the head sometimes before I "get it". But I also think Harry really does have a "saving people thing". He has spent many many years under the Dursley's "care". He realized very early on that he had to take care of things himself, because no one in his life (from the Dursley's to school officials) came to his aid when he needed it. So why should he suddenly start seeking adult guidance? He's still getting used to the idea of there being adults around who are willing to help him: When he has the dream of V killing Frank Bryce, it takes quite a few minutes for him to think of Sirius as a counselor (GoF, chap 2). So it makes sense to me that he realizes he has this situation, but he is well-trained to think he has to handle it himself. He doesn't connect the dots because he thinks the *dots* are the problem. Adesa From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sat Dec 18 17:25:08 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 17:25:08 -0000 Subject: Who knew what ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120044 I, Del, asked earlier: " 2. Who in the Order knows about Harry's dreams of the corridor?" Francois replied : "Well, Snape most likely did, (snip) "Knowing that Snape can "put two and two together like only Snape can", I would be surprised that Snape didn't figure it out. To me, the question would then be "did Snape report this ?"" Del answers: I just re-read the scene, and Harry actually *told* Snape he'd been having those visions. So the question is indeed to know whether Snape reported this, and to whom. If he reported it *only* to DD, who already knew, then it almost doesn't change anything to the situation : the probability that the other Order members didn't know about Harry's recurrent dreams is still there. Especially since, according to DD (in his end-of-book talk), Snape *discovered* those dreams when Harry told him : if DD didn't tell *Snape* (who was supposed to teach Harry Occlumency) the very reason Harry needed to learn it, it's not such a wild assumption to make to suggest that maybe DD didn't tell *anyone*. As for Snape putting 2 and 2 together, my question is : did Snape know about the Prophecy? Because if he didn't, he couldn't properly make that addition. Del From tombadgerlock at freesurf.fr Sat Dec 18 15:17:09 2004 From: tombadgerlock at freesurf.fr (totorivers) Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 15:17:09 -0000 Subject: Yet another defense of Snape's Occlumency lessons (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120045 dungrollin: > > I find Harry's insistence on dwelling on his anger peculiar. > Fear is something I find much more difficult to control than anger > ? possibly because external influences are the cause of the > feeling, but anger (although also dependent on external influences) > is more dependent upon my mood, and attitude, and I can master > that. In this, Harry has reactions opposite to mine, (he easily > overcomes his fear, but not his anger) so perhaps that's why I > have little sympathy for his difficulties. It would be interesting > if the people who are on his side in this debate react similarly to > him ? have difficulty getting over anger, but less difficulty > getting over fear. toto: Hum, I must say I too have lots of problem getting past my fears, but I can empathise with Harry: he had trouble forcing himself to do something important and get past his dislike of a teacher. I know for myself that I had period where I couldn't open a book and work at home simply because my mother had said a sentence that kept me on edge: I knew I should, but I just had lot of trouble doing it. I have seen here a comparison between the patronus lesson and the occlumency ones. The patronus lesson were done by a teacher that tried and understood Harry, Harry managed to do it, and saved Sirius' life. The occlumency were done by someone insulting him and barking at him, he couldn't do it, he killed Sirius. There is some kind of pattern there, I think. dungrollin: > I'm not sure how posters can argue that Snape hasn't told > Harry how to practise. Is it that bit in the first lesson, where > Harry says `you're not telling me how'? Because immediately after > that Snape *does* explain about ridding one's mind of emotion. toto: But how? How does one clear his mind? By focalising on an image as so many do it, by repeating a mantra as some occidental people do and like it is done in bjh's adaptation? I must confess that if someone told me to clear my mind and get past my anger, I would have no way to do it. I think Harry should have had easier exercise first, and then learnt to clear his mind. Snape was faultive there, I think. dungrollin: > The basic problem was one of trust, and Harry's lack of it in > others. Phineas Nigellus summed it up nicely: "Have you never > paused, while feeling hard-done-by, to note that following > Dumbeldore's orders has never yet led you into harm?" Of course > mistakes were made, but the biggie was that Harry should > have known the full prophecy at the end of GoF, then he'd have > known that Voldy might try to lure him to the DoM. That would have > prevented a lot of problems. toto: I happen to agree there. Harry got on my nerves in the book for not listening to others. He *could* have told Hermione that he didn't get occlumency, and she would have found a book and given him lesson to help him. I can empathise there too though, as I have done some stupid things when I couldn't manage to do something, and Harry has never learnt yet to go for help when he needs it (the occurence with Lupin had Lupin gently probing, not Harry delivering himself freely). But still, he was pretty stupid there, and he has done something I have never done: blaming adult when he could simply find a solution by himself. But as you said, Harry has a big baggage problem from his abuse by the Dursleys, and it won't be easy to get past that. Dungrollin: > So don't blame it all on Snape, particularly when DD and Harry > have both accepted the blame for their various mistakes. Toto: I don't blame it all on Snape. As I have said, it should have been pretty obvious that both Snape and Harry wouldn't be able to ignore their emotional baggage. Thus, the majority of the blame comes to DD who should never have put the lessons in the hand of Snape. :) But I would say that Snape, as an adult and a teacher, should know that barking at a child and not explaining in detail (to say "clear your mind and empty your emtion" without telling how to do it is to lack in detail) is not the right way to teach something, especially to a teenager who hates you already. Snape knows this. He is the adult. He should have been the one to first make an effort. Of course, he did make an effort I guess, but not enough to give a chance to Harry. Toto, who knows how it is to feel unable to work on something because of a teacher, and who needs some detail to be able to do things otherwordly like clearing his mind. From tombadgerlock at freesurf.fr Sat Dec 18 14:34:41 2004 From: tombadgerlock at freesurf.fr (totorivers) Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 14:34:41 -0000 Subject: ESE! Lupin? (Re: Lupin's Boggart ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120046 > Pippin: > pleased to have come up with an explanation that works whether > Lupin is ESE! or not Toto: Lupin ESE? Does that mean ever so evil or something? Why would Lupin be evil? I can understand people saying Snape or even Percy are evil, but Lupin? Where does that idea comes from? Toto, just curious. From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sat Dec 18 17:37:55 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 17:37:55 -0000 Subject: I don't like him much In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120047 Alla wrote: " Are you saying that if Harry would have been given an information that Voldie may plant false visions in his head, he would have not practised "clearing his mind"?" Del replies : Er, isn't it *exactly* what Snape told him in their very first Occlumency lesson? 'The important point is that the Dark Lord is now aware that you are gaining access to this thoughts and feelings. He has also deduced that the process is likely to work in reverse; that is to say, he has realised that he might be able to access your thoughts and feelings in return-' 'And he might try and make me do things?' asked Harry. 'Sir?' he added hurriedly. 'He might,' said Snape, sounding cold and unconcerned. 'Which brings us back to Occlumency.' Snape might have sounded unconcerned, but Harry should have been concerned IMO. The problem is that a few minutes later, Harry understands which corridor he's been dreaming about, and from then on he becomes too obsessed with that corridor to ponder what Snape DID tell him : that he was in danger of being misled and even possessed. Del From tzakis1225 at netzero.com Sat Dec 18 18:12:43 2004 From: tzakis1225 at netzero.com (demetra1225) Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 18:12:43 -0000 Subject: I don't like him much In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120048 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > Well, that part I disagree with. I tend to think that additional > information would have made A LOT of difference, I AM of opinion > that Harry did act as typical teenage boy, but he is not stupid (in my opinion, at least) and he is not evil (also in my opinion) He is definitely not evil (IMO) nor do I think he is stupid. I think that he, like many 15 year olds, thinks he *knows* a lot more than he really does. Alla again: > Are you saying that if Harry would have been given an information > that Voldie may plant false visions in his head, he would have not > practised "clearing his mind"? I think that Snape alluded to that possibility in his first lesson. But I think that Harry really wanted those visions to continue. I think he underestimated the risk of false visions. Likewise, because of the Arthur/snake incident, he overestimated the advantages of continuing the dreams/visions. Demetra From MadameSSnape at aol.com Sat Dec 18 18:16:46 2004 From: MadameSSnape at aol.com (MadameSSnape at aol.com) Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 13:16:46 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Questions Message-ID: <1a5.2cf35cfe.2ef5ce0e@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120049 In a message dated 12/17/2004 10:38:44 PM Eastern Standard Time, vmonte at yahoo.com writes: 2. Was Lupin a werewolf on the night that Lily and James were killed? ========== Sherrie here: Not if she's going by real world lunar phases. In October, 1981, the Moon would've been somewhere just past new, having reached full phase on 13 October. Sherrie House [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com Sat Dec 18 18:22:44 2004 From: coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com (Caius Marcius) Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 18:22:44 -0000 Subject: FILK: We Need A Little Queerditch Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120050 We Need A Little Queerditch (QTA, Chap. 3) To the tune of We Need a Little Christmas, from Jerry Herman's Mame The Scene: Queerditch Marsh, 11th Century. Two teams prepare to compete in the new game of Queerditch, much to the disgust of local witch Gertie Keddle (AN: The game of swivenhodge, as related in QTA Chap. 2, was a forerunner of Qudditch). SCOTTISH WARLOCK Lend me some leather Soar on your broom before ol' Gertie screams again. Head for the marshes For now the crucial thing is, start the game again now. For we need a little Queerditch Right this very second, Boulders bid us welcome Broomsticks bravely beckon Yes, we need a little Queerditch Right this very second, We had enough of hodge & swiven It's time we had us some real livin' GERTIE These guys act so dimly This is the biggest waste of time I've ever seen. They're all such fruitcakes It's time I flung some hexes at those great hairy cows For I want to shun the boulders Going back to bladders, Going to less odder Games are less madder And I have a lot of anger With some hostile chatter Ditch your queer Queerditch game now. CHORUS OF PLAYERS Soon on our broomsticks You may presume we'll zoom through each and ev'ry game GERTIE I think it's shocking SCOTTISH WARLOCK: But Gertie K., each Tuesday, you watch till the sun's down. CHORUS OF PLAYERS For you need a little Queerditch When out in your cabbage, Though we may seem hairy And a little savage Yes, you need a little Queerditch Right this very second, SCOTTISH WARLOCK: `Cause after us you'll never settle For boring days out in the nettles CHORUS OF PLAYERS Perhaps we act dimly And it's the biggest waste of time that's ever been Because we're fruitcakes, But in a thousand years they'll still play Queerditch, we vow All we need's a little magic, Need a bigger basket, Need a greener field Secrecy to mask it, And we need to not let purty Gertie blow a gasket Need a little Queerditch now. (Instrumental bridge, as the two teams soar into action, cheered on by Gwenog, Gertie's neighbor.) GWENOG & CHORUS Need a little Queerditch now! - CMC HARRY POTTER FILKS http://home.att.net/~coriolan.hpfilks.htm From a_b_desert_king at hotmail.com Sat Dec 18 18:43:54 2004 From: a_b_desert_king at hotmail.com (a_b_desert_king) Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 18:43:54 -0000 Subject: Themes in OotP (was Re: Angry Harry in HBP?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120051 > > Geoff: > With respect, I think you are forgetting the story line of POA. Harry > did /not/ set out to confront Sirius. > > snip > As I said previously, Harry does not set out to confront Sirius. He > and the others set out to rescue Ron who appears to be in serious > danger. They do not know it is Sirius until he "decloaks" in the > Shrieking Shack. I am sorry but I believe that your analysis of this > event is totally wrong. > > Geoff > Heather Responds; I concede that Harry and the others do not actually set out to confront Sirius in the Shrieking Shack. Perhaps I didn't really explain how I came to believe that Harry wanted to confront Sirius and kill him very well. In PoA 'The Firebolt' (pg 158 - 160 Am. Version) after the kids have overheard the story about Sirius's betrayal in the Three Broomsticks we see how much hatred Harry feels towards Sirius: "A hatred such as he had never known before was coursing through Harry like poison. ...(pg158)" "'Harry, listen' said Hermoine, exchanging a look with Ron, 'you must be really upset about what we heard yesterday. But the thing is, you mustn't go doing anything stupid.' 'Like what?' said Harry 'Like trying to go after Black, said Ron sharply. Harry could tell they had rehearsed this conversation while he had been asleep. He didn't say anything. 'You won't, will you, Harry?' said Hermoine. 'Because Black's not worth dying for,' said Ron. Harry looked at them. They didn't seem to understand at all. .....omit.... 'So what are you saying?" said Ron, lookking very tense. "You want to - to kill Black or somehting?' 'Don't be silly,' said Hermoine in a panicky voice. 'Harry doesn't want to kill anyone, do you, Harry?' Again, Harry didn't answer." (pg159) I guess I figured that if the opportunity hadn't presented itself as it did then Harry would have actively persued Sirius at some point and done who knows what... That was the point I was making, but you are totally correct in saying that Harry did not set out to confront Sirius. :) Heather From spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com Sat Dec 18 18:47:18 2004 From: spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com (dungrollin) Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 18:47:18 -0000 Subject: Yet another defense of Snape's Occlumency lessons (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120052 Heavily snipped as it was getting long. Alla: First, let me say it first Harry did not practice. He did not. No question about it. It was Harry's mistake. I am arguing though that Snape's lessons gave Harry almost no help and a lot of harm. In fact, I was having flashbacks to their first potion lesson, where (in my opinion only) Snape went out of his way to make Harry hate him. So, before Harry has to come to Snape's office, Harry has no idea why he has to learn Occlumency, right? Dungrollin: Well, actually, one can argue that he should at the very least have had some suspicions. In 12GP Snape says "Occlumency, Potter. The magical defence of the mind against external penetration." It should be fairly obvious to someone who's been having visions of real events happening hundreds of miles away from the point of LV, why he might need to learn it, shouldn't it? Perhaps not the specifics, but he knows that his mind and Voldy's are linked through the scar. Clearly DD wants it to stop, and clearly DD thinks the best way to do this is for him to learn Occlumency. Alla again: True, Snape tells Harry to clear his mind, but again he does not tell him HOW to do it. No breathing exercises, no nothing. I read it differently than you do. I don't think it is sufficient. I know I would not have found such instructions to be sufficient if I was given them for meditation and I am twice as old as Harry is. Dungrollin, previously: > I'm not sure how posters can argue that Snape hasn't told > Harry how to practise. Is it that bit in the first lesson, where > Harry says `you're not telling me how'? Because > immediately after that Snape *does* explain about ridding one's > mind of emotion. Alla: NO, he does not, not in my opinion, he just say empty your mind of th emotion he does not say how to do it. Dungrollin now: But Harry *never once* says (and neither does the narrator) that he finds it difficult or impossible to clear his mind at night. The only hint we get that it *might* have been difficult was in the quote that you snipped, - not until after DD leaves in April when too much has been happening for Harry to even remember to try. And then it was just a "...he was sure he would not have been able to empty his mind even if he had tried" referring to the events of the previous week. Hardly evidence of someone wrestling with the impossibility of a task for which he's been ill-prepared. If the reason that he wasn't progressing was that Snape hadn't explained how to clear his mind, we'd should have seen some instances of him lying in bed trying to clear his mind and failing. And we didn't see anything like that. Dungrollin, previously: And why does Harry insist that he'll never forgive Snape? Because of Snape's sneer when Harry told him `He's got Padfoot at the place where it's hidden!' Because Snape goaded Sirius and implied Sirius was a coward. No resentment about Snape not teaching him Occlumency *properly*, Harry takes the blame for not learning himself. However, after Harry takes the blame, he starts trying to blame Snape for everything, he does a U-turn and says Snape stopped the lessons, and accuses him of making it worse, making it easier for Voldy. DD doesn't reply to the accusations, but says he trusts Snape, and implies that the reason Snape stopped the lessons was that he couldn't overcome his feelings about James. - No mention of Snape not teaching Occlumency properly *while the lessons were going on*. Alla replied: Nope, blaming him for Sirius death is only aprt of the problem as you said yourself, Harry also tells Dumbledore that he felt worse after the lessons and he INDEED felt worse. Dungrollin now: But Dumbledore doesn't say "Goodness, was it really *worse* after the lessons? Snape can't have been teaching you properly..." does he? He ignores it, knowing that it doesn't mean Snape was guilty of anything. Alla: Remember this? Here is my question to you. If indeed feeling worse after the lesson is unavolidable side effect, which we have no proof of, why, oh why did Snape not WARNED Harry that he WILL feel worse? Dungrollin: Now that's a good point, but by the same argument, why on earth didn't Harry go to the next Occlumency lesson saying "I felt really dreadful after the last lesson, is that normal?" Dungrollin, previously: > My biggest problem with the idea that Snape didn't teach Harry > Occlumency properly, is Snape's motivation. Why on earth should > he deliberately omit vital instructions? Nobody (IIRC) seems to > have suggested a plausible motivation ? but I doubt that any will go as far as postulating ESE!Snape either. Alla replied: Eh? Why not? For the record, I don't believe in ESE! Snape, but quite strong case can be put together in favor of ESE!Snape, I think. Dungrollin now: That's exactly my point ? you don't believe in ESE!Snape ? so give me a good motivation for him deliberately withholding vital information about the proper way to learn Occlumency. That's what you were arguing before, wasn't it? Dungrollin, previously: >> So don't blame it all on Snape, particularly when DD and Harry > have both accepted the blame for their various mistakes. Alla: Sorry, but may I continue blame A LOT of it on Snape, please? :o) But don't worry I blame Dumbledore too and even Harry,although to lesser extent. Dungrollin: Sorry, that should have read: I don't think you can blame it all on Snape... In conclusion: Harry knew full well what Snape was like, and that Snape would take every opportunity to insult him, and he knew what Snape's teaching methods were like. It doesn't alter the fact that he *was* capable of clearing his mind and he didn't do it. It never occurred to him that actually learning Occlumency would have got him out of the lessons eventually, and more quickly than not learning it. Nor did it occur to him that if he were *really* concerned that Snape was doing more harm than good there were three other order members around he could have gone to with questions. Obviously the lessons were a disaster, and obviously DD should have taught Harry himself. I wrote the original post to counter claims that Snape *deliberately* didn't teach Harry properly. IMO, all he can be accused of is being Snape. Dungrollin From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sat Dec 18 18:56:55 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 18:56:55 -0000 Subject: Did Snape know WHY he must teach Harry Occlumency? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120053 According to DD, Snape only discovered about Harry's recurrent corridor dreams when he started teaching him. This means that the ONLY occurence of Harry-LV contact Snape might have known about previously was the Snake Dream. Moreover, we don't know whether Snape knew about the Prophecy and the fact that LV was trying to get it. When Harry asked him what was in the DoM, Snape told him that there was nothing there that concerns him. Was he outright lying ? If Snape didn't know about the Prophecy, he couldn't understand how crucial it was that Harry be protected from mental invasion by LV. Was Snape also outright lying when he told Harry that he was "neither special nor important" ? If Snape knew about the Prophecy, he couldn't say such a thing. And if he knew, why did he lie? It was counter-productive to assure Harry that there was nothing special about him, to say the least. And also there's Snape's reaction when Harry asked him why he needed to learn Occlumency at the start of his first lesson : instead of giving a straight answer, Snape stalled, mocked Harry's intelligence, and started explaining about Legilimency. And before that, at 12GP, he'd said it was because DD thought it was a good idea. Could it be that Snape did NOT know why Harry needed to learn Occlumency? Could it be that Snape was only teaching Harry reluctantly because DD told him to, but without telling him why? If DD misled Snape as to Harry's true relationship with LV, then it's no surprise that Snape didn't do too good a job and gave up so easily : he couldn't see the point of those lessons to start with. Del From olivier.fouquet+harry at m4x.org Sat Dec 18 19:21:57 2004 From: olivier.fouquet+harry at m4x.org (olivier.fouquet+harry at m4x.org) Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 20:21:57 +0100 Subject: ESE!Lupin Message-ID: <15742037-512A-11D9-8E90-000A95665DE8@m4x.org> No: HPFGUIDX 120054 Ah Toto... ESE! Lupin is a very dangerous an oh so evil werewolf indeed. Here is a sample of what he did: 1) Disgruntled with the discrimination against Werewolves and plagued with guilt for having betrayed Dumbledore, he started to spy for Voldemort one year before Harry's parents' death. 2) He managed to convince James to be his Secret-Keeper and then betrayed him. 3) Afterwards, he sent the Lestranges to torture the Longbottoms. 4) During the long years that followed, he actively worked to revive Voldemort. 5) In PoA, he purposefully did not take his potion in order to transform at the perfect time to kill Harry and Sirius. His plan backfired a bit, though he managed to have Peter escape. He was the one who sent the Dementors towards Harry and Sirius. 6) In GoF, he killed Cedric. 7) In OoP, he imperioed Sturgis Podmore, fed countless informations to Voldemort and killed Sirius. I have never read that he was the one that planted Tom's diary amongst Ginny's books, but I suspect it was him nevertheless. You can find all this brilliantly argued in posts by Pippin too numerous to count. If you search long enough, you will find motives, justifications and hints for all of the above in her messages. I assume and in fact hope she will introduce the theory herself in answer to your post. Then again, some of us aren't still completely convinced. Olivier From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sat Dec 18 19:32:50 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 19:32:50 -0000 Subject: Yet another defense of Snape's Occlumency lessons (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120055 Alla wrote : "Now, my very first reaction to this part was something along the line "how dare you, Snape, Harry earned the right to call Voldie whatever name he wants" It is possible that Voldemort's name makes Dark Mark to react in some way, I will concede, but until I know that for sure, I choose to think that Snape is simply jealous of Harry who is brave enough to do what an "extremely powerful wizard Dumbledore" does call Voldemort by his real name. If I am correct, are you saying that teacher who is jealous of his student will be able to teach such student properly?" Del replies : First, to answer that last question : why not?? I think pretty much every teacher, be he a Lupin or a Snape, inevitably finds himself sometimes faced with a student much more talented, a student he's jealous of. But that doesn't stop most teachers from properly teaching those students they are jealous of. Second : we still don't know why people fear saying LV's name out loud. DD makes it sound like it's just some kind of superstition, but DD isn't the most reliable source of information we've got. There might be a very good reason people don't say the name. After all, Hermione wasn't taught not to say the name by living example, she got her info from books only, and yet she doesn't dare saying the name either for years. This could be because she read about the real reason people shouldn't say the name. Third : Harry isn't brave in saying LV's name. He simply never learned to do otherwise. About this mind-clearing business now. Harry isn't troubled by the instruction, and I think it's pretty obvious why : he already knows how to do that, because he's had to do things very similar before. Accio and the Patronus Charm, for example, require that the wizard concentrate hard on one thing only. More generally, it seems that most charms and spells require that the wizard concentrate hard on what they are doing. Moreover, Snape did remind Harry of the Imperius Curse, which gave Harry an idea of what to do. Alla wrote: " Here is my question to you. If indeed feeling worse after the lesson is unavolidable side effect, which we have no proof of, why, oh why did Snape not WARNED Harry that he WILL feel worse? Don't you think it would help harry to trust Snape a bit more? To me this is a great proof of Snape being a sadist towards Harry. If he knew how Harry would feel, but did nothing about it, or at least told Harry to take it easy for this day, then yes, he IS responsible in my opinion." Del replies : 1. How EVER was Snape supposed to know that Harry's scar would hurt more after the Occlumency lessons??? Nobody has ever dealt with such a scar, and Harry didn't tell Snape what he was feeling. Maybe if he'd told him, Snape would have been worried. 2. This pain could be akin to sore muscles. Muscles hurt after an intense workout, but they are not weakened by it, quite the opposite. 3. The pain could have been an indication that the lessons were highly effective. It could have been an indication that LV was now unable to access Harry's mind. To explain it figuratively : maybe LV was trying to enter Harry's mind and found the door closed, when it was usually wide open. So he would start pummelling the door, which would hurt Harry. Alla wrote : " I don't think that Snape will deliberately betray the Order, but he may let hsi emotions rile up again and by accidentdo somethign which will put Order in danger." Del replies : You do realise that Harry has *already* done that, don't you ;-) ? Del From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sat Dec 18 19:52:54 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 19:52:54 -0000 Subject: Can Occlumency be taught ?(was:Umbridge and Harry's Temptations) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120056 imamommy wrote: "Well, I agree with Alla that something was midding from Snape's instruction, namely, er, instruction. The only direction he gave Harry, IIRC, was to clear his mind. He never told Harry how to fight against him, he never told him how to lock him out, just clear your mind. So, IMO, Snape never really *taught* Harry Occlumency, he just attacked, over and over again. Why this could be is a subject for another post." Del replies : Could it be simply because Occlumency cannot be taught? Snape describes it as "an obscure branch of magic, but a highly useful one". Useful indeed! In a world where wizards can use Imperio and Legilimency on each other, you'd think Occlumency would be a compulsory subject for all wizards to learn. But it's not. And why would that be? I can think of only 2 reasons : 1. It's Dark Magic. But unless we haven't been told everything about it, I fail to see why it would be classified as such. 2. It can't be taught. Just like resisting the Imperius Curse can't be taught. Maybe Occlumens are born, not made, just like Metamorphmagi. Harry resisting the Imperius Curse the year before might have hinted at him being an Occlumens. I would also like to repeat something that has been said over and over again, but that I find important : when teaching the kids to resist Imperio, Crouch!Moody didn't do anything but put them under the Curse. Being put under the curse and shaking it seems to be the only way to learn to resist it. Similarly, it could very well be that learning Occlumency can be done only be clearing one's mind and shaking a Legilimency curse. Del From annemehr at yahoo.com Sat Dec 18 20:02:02 2004 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 20:02:02 -0000 Subject: Yet another defense of Snape's Occlumency lessons (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120057 Most of you probably know I spread the blame for the failure of Occlumency lessons around quite liberally. I just have one or two points to respond to. > Alla replied: > > Nope, blaming him for Sirius death is only aprt of the problem as > you said yourself, Harry also tells Dumbledore that he felt worse > after the lessons and he INDEED felt worse. > > Dungrollin now: > But Dumbledore doesn't say "Goodness, was it really *worse* after > the lessons? Snape can't have been teaching you properly..." > does he? He ignores it, knowing that it doesn't mean Snape was > guilty of anything. Annemehr: He didn't respond, because it was just *before* Harry said Snape made it worse that Dumbledore said 'I have already said that it was a mistake for me not to teach you myself, though I was sure, at the time, that nothing could have been more dangerous than to open your mind even further to Voldemort while in my presence -' Either Harry was expanding on that statement by saying Snape made it worse, or they were talking past each other (or some of each). But in any case, it's true: Occlumency lessons in themselves made Harry feel worse. It seems very odd that he wasn't told about this, for the sake of not losing any more trust in Snape, since Dumbledore knew it would be so. > Alla: > Remember this? > > Here is my question to you. If indeed feeling worse after the lesson > is unavolidable side effect, which we have no proof of, why, oh why > did Snape not WARNED Harry that he WILL feel worse? > > Dungrollin: > Now that's a good point, but by the same argument, why on earth > didn't Harry go to the next Occlumency lesson saying "I felt > really dreadful after the last lesson, is that normal?" > Annemehr: I suppose Harry assumed he would have been snarled at for admitting to more scar pain and headaches, just as he was for seeing the DoM and the room where Voldemort talked to Rookwood. It would be like admitting to Snape that he was failing. Annemehr From houseofbohacek at earthlink.net Sat Dec 18 20:15:07 2004 From: houseofbohacek at earthlink.net (klyanthea) Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 20:15:07 -0000 Subject: Filk: We Three Kids Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120058 We Three Kids A Filk by Gail B. to the tune of We Three Kings Dedicated to CV..love ya babe. Midi is right here: http://www.carols.org.uk/we_three_kings_of_0rient_are.htm Trio: We three kids are trying to brew Polyjuice in an empty loo Nick and Creevey and Finch-Fletchley Petrified, but by who? Refrain: O Heir of Slyth'rin's lair's unsealed Where it is, that fact's concealed Monster lurking, Draco smirking This secret must be revealed Harry: In the library we should find A book there, but we're in a bind Need permission for that section Lockhart, I'm sure, won't mind Refrain Hermione: Boomslang skin from Snape's private store We must cause some kind of uproar An explosion in a potion Then I'll sneak through the door Refrain Ron: Crabbe and Goyle, a bit of them we'd Have to find ere we can proceed We will get these with drugged pastries No toenails, we've agreed Refrain Trio: Potion's done, now we must comsume To enter Slyth'rin's Common Room How revolting, how we're molting New bodies we've assumed Refrain -Gail B. From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sat Dec 18 20:15:55 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 20:15:55 -0000 Subject: Adults "failing" Harry (was: Themes in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120059 Finwitch wrote: " The thing is - they ARE at war. Everyone IS involved, aware or not. Those who *know* what's going on are better equipped to deal with it and to survive. The decision of not telling the kids anything simply proves to me that these wizards truly aren't much for logic." Del replies : The thing is - they are NOT at war. There hasn't been a declaration of war, there isn't an official enemy camp, there aren't open battles, there's no army, there is no state of war, and so on. The WW is NOT at war during OoP. There's a war going on, yes, but a COLD war. A war of spies and under-cover actions. A hidden war, where 99,9% of the population isn't even aware of a war going on (up until Harry's interview is published anyway). Many many countries are in this situation right now. And yet their populations aren't taught the arts of war, are they? The whole point of OoP was *precisely* to turn this cold war into an "hot" one : it was to bring it out in the open. Finwitch wrote: "And Harry in particular *was* involved since before his birth, HAS faced Voldemort more times than the adults, so er - keeping Harry in the dark was just stupid. No one ever told him that V might feed him false visions - just that he knew of the connection and that was somehow dangerous..." Del replies: Because most probably no one even KNEW. We don't know that anyone apart from DD knows about the Prophecy. We don't know that anyone apart from DD, Snape, Ron and Hermione know about Harry's recurring dreams of the corridor. And nobody has EVER had to deal with a scar-connection such as the one between Harry and LV, so HOW could they tell him what to expect??? Finwitch wrote : "And what comes to Harry's emotional health - yes, Sirius is the one who should keep that as the godfather - he tries, but after 12 years with Dementors, short break and back in the house that created some of the memories he was more or less forced to dwell in for 12 years - he's not in much of a healthy emotional state himself." Del replies : And Molly is terrified that her husband and kids are going to end up the same way her brothers did in VWI : dead. And Lupin is trying to survive in a world whose leaders wish him dead or worse. And and and... They are ALL in "not much of a healthy emotional state" themselves. So tell me : WHO could take care of Harry's emotional health? Finwitch wrote : "According to Dumbledore's interpretation of Trelawney's the first prophecy, Harry IS the one able to defeat Voldemort. Therefore, the future of both WW and MW rests upon Harry. That means that HARRY is important. This includes not just physical safety (which Dumbledore haven't been able to provide at Hogwarts) but emotional as well. After all, if Harry's emotional state goes down enough, he might not fight at all, but just be quiet and wait to die - or be more active and commit suicide. And what would that mean to Dumbledore's plans?" Del replies : It seems obvious to me that this is PRECISELY the reason DD didn't tell Harry about the Prophecy : because he didn't want to put even more emotional stress on him. DD is well aware that the boy doesn't have much of a support network. But there's nothing he can do about it : there's simply nobody available to parent Harry. So DD tries to do the only thing he can do : preserve Harry's sanity by not putting more stress than necessary on him. Tell me : what ELSE could he have done ? Del From annemehr at yahoo.com Sat Dec 18 20:19:07 2004 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 20:19:07 -0000 Subject: Did Snape know WHY he must teach Harry Occlumency? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120060 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: > > If DD misled Snape as to Harry's true relationship with LV, then it's > no surprise that Snape didn't do too good a job and gave up so easily > : he couldn't see the point of those lessons to start with. > > Del Which gives Snape exactly the same excuse as Harry. Annemehr ;) From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sat Dec 18 20:35:12 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 20:35:12 -0000 Subject: You're in the A rmy, now. wasFalse Alarm? Was:Re: Adults "failing" Harry (in tP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120061 Alla wrote: "Pippin, I had in mind specific example, which I quoted earlier - not telling Harry about prophecy and we KNOW that nobody told Harry about it. Even though Sirius clearly wanted to and I wish he would disobey this particular order." Del replies: How do we know that Sirius knew about the Prophecy and that he wanted to tell Harry about it? How do we know that anyone apart from DD knew about the Prophecy but that they were ordered by DD not to mention it? Alla wrote: "Even Sirius obeyed the Orders pretty well, considering the fact just how much he hated Grimmauld place and still he stayed there, because that was Dumbledore told him to do ( another example of the general not knowing his soldiers basic needs, if you ask me)." Del replies: And WHAT was Sirius's most basic need, if not being safe? Sirius had *already* been sentenced to the Kiss, that's what he would have gotten if the Ministry had managed to catch him. Everything else pales in comparison to THAT danger, IMO. Alla wrote: " And here would be the ideal moment to explain to Harry that even though this vision was real, some of them ... may not be, so Harry should be on his guard. I am not quite sure why it was so obvious to adults of the Order that Harry will figure it out on his own." Del replies: I'm not sure the adults figured it out themselves. Harry's curse-scar is unique, nobody knows how it works and what can be done through it. In particular, I doubt anyone knows that LV can send false visions through it. The adults are just as much in the dark as Harry, where his scar is concerned. More than Harry, in fact, since he doesn't tell them everything. Del From meriaugust at yahoo.com Sat Dec 18 20:36:50 2004 From: meriaugust at yahoo.com (meriaugust) Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 20:36:50 -0000 Subject: A child is, by definition, WRONG In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120062 chrusotoxos wrote: > In a way I admire him [Harry], he's so brave and all, but at the same time I'm like, Calm down, > adults know what is good for you! Meri: I have been lurking for the last few weeks reading the threads about Harry's character and I didn't feel the need to jump in until I read this post. To say that Harry should sit back and trust the adults in his life to do what is best for him is to ignore the fact that the adults in Harry's life don't always know what is best for him and didn't always act in his best interest. Case in point: the Dursleys. For a decade Harry lived with him and learned that he couldn't look to adults for help or care or trust. They certainly never acted in Harry's best intersts, whether it be by practically starving him, forcing to sleep in a tiny cupboard, punnishments that kept him locked up for days at a time or barring his windows. Ten years of these kinds of experiences will train a kid not to trust grownups to do what is best. In SS people criticize Harry for going after the Stone. But remember, first he tried to go to Dumbledore and explain the situation, and then he confessed everything to MM. But DD was gone from the castle (as part of Quirell!Mort's plan) and MM *didn't believe him*. He told her the truth and instead of taking him seriously she dismissed him. And he was right: someone was trying to steal the Stone and if Harry hadn't made it there when he did, there is every possiblilty that Quirell!Mort would have figured out how to get the Stone from the Mirror of Erised. snip Children can be cute, > but they are not always right!! Meri: Grownups aren't always right either, as DD says in Order. And just because Harry's a kid doesn't mean that every decision he makes is wrong! Meri - defending Harry... From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sat Dec 18 20:59:48 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 20:59:48 -0000 Subject: A child is, by definition, WRONG In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120063 Meri wrote : " To say that Harry should sit back and trust the adults in his life to do what is best for him is to ignore the fact that the adults in Harry's life don't always know what is best for him and didn't always act in his best interest." Del replies: That's true of any adult in any kid's life. But as Phineas reminded Harry, following DD's orders never got him into trouble before. Meri wrote: " Case in point: the Dursleys. For a decade Harry lived with him and learned that he couldn't look to adults for help or care or trust. They certainly never acted in Harry's best intersts, whether it be by practically starving him, forcing to sleep in a tiny cupboard, punnishments that kept him locked up for days at a time or barring his windows. Ten years of these kinds of experiences will train a kid not to trust grownups to do what is best. " Del replies: I understand your point, but : 1. Harry can talk, walk, write, read, and so on. So the Dursleys did get quite a few important things right. 2. The extreme punishments you mentioned were for extreme situations. They were in no way part of his routine life. 3. Don't mix up the examples. Barring the windows and keeping him locked up for days happened *after* Harry started going to Hogwarts, and they were always related with magic. They weren't part of his pre-Hogwarts growing-up (as implied by "ten years of these kinds of experience") Meri wrote : "And he was right: someone was trying to steal the Stone and if Harry hadn't made it there when he did, there is every possiblilty that Quirell!Mort would have figured out how to get the Stone from the Mirror of Erised. " Del replies : Actually no, the evidence points to the contrary : QuirrellMort wanted to use the Stone, so by definition he would never have managed to get it. And DD was on the way back anyway. Del From gbannister10 at aol.com Sat Dec 18 21:39:06 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 21:39:06 -0000 Subject: Themes in OotP (was Re: Angry Harry in HBP?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120064 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "a_b_desert_king" wrote: > Heather: > I guess I figured that if the opportunity hadn't presented itself as > it did then Harry would have actively persued Sirius at some point > and done who knows what... > > That was the point I was making, but you are totally correct in > saying that Harry did not set out to confront Sirius. :) Geoff: I see your point, but there is a world of difference between saying "If I get my hands on him, I'll kill him" and actually getting the opportunity. Just looking at the logistics of the thing, how would Harry set out to confront Sirius? How would he know where to start? With half the Wizarding World out searching for Sirius anyway, how would Harry find him on his own? The confrontation, when it came, was, to Harry, a complete fluke. It was dictated by /Sirius's/ wish to get his hands on Pettigrew which meant that /he/ had to come to Ron (and hence to Harry) and not the other way round. From gbannister10 at aol.com Sat Dec 18 22:25:28 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 22:25:28 -0000 Subject: A child is, by definition, WRONG In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120065 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "chrusotoxos" wrote: Chrusotoxos: > In my opinion, Harry has always acted the little hero, never trusting the adults surrounding > him. Everybody said that the Philosopher's stone was well protected? Na, don't believe it! > Let's go and rescue it! And the same goes for the Chamber (why, why going down that > thing with Lockart!, when there are so many good teachers around them?) and for most of > the things Harry says and does. Geoff: Let's just consider the Chamber of Secrets scenario for a moment as an example. Ron and Harry have found the notes in Hermione's hand and: 'And beneath this, a single word had been written, in a hand Harry recognised as Hermione's. Pipes. It was as though somebody had just flicked a light on in his brain. "Ron," he breathed, "this is it. This is the answer. the monster in the Chamber's a Basilisk - a giant serpent!"' (COS "The Chamber of Secrets" p.215 UK edition) '"But how's the Basilisk been getting around the place?" said Ron. "A dirty great snake... Someone would've seen..." Harry, however, pointed at the word Hermione had scribbled at the foot of the page. "Pipes," he said, "Pipes.. Ron, it's been using the plumbing. I've been hearing that voice inside the walls.." Ron suddenly grabbed Harry's arm. "The entrance to the Chamber of Secrets!" he said hoarsely. "What if it's a bathroom? What if it's in - " " - Moaning Myrtle's bathroom," said Harry. They sat there, excitement coursing through them, hardly able to believe it.' (ibid. p.216) Notice that they are about to go to Professor McGonagall (and not haring off on their own) when the announcement for all students to return to their dormitories is given; they hide in the staff room cloakroom to overhear the news that Ginny has been taken into the Chamber. Gilderoy Lockhart appears late and the staff remind him that he has claimed to know where the Chamber entrance is. So.. 'Lockhart gazed round at his stony-faced colleagues. "I.. I really never... You may have misunderstood.." "We'll leave it to you, then, Gilderoy," said Professor McGonagall. "Tonight will be an excellent time to do it. We'll make sure everyone's out of your way..." So he leaves saying that he will be in his office, getting ready... "Right," said Professor McGonagall, whose nostrils were flared, "That's got him out from under our feet. The Heads of Houses should go and inform their students what has happened. Tell them the Hogwarts Express will take them home first thing tomorrow.." (ibid. p.218) So the person to deal with is Lockhart. The others are involved in the preparations for closing the school. So, quite sensibly, they concentrate on Lockhart. '"D'you know what?" said Ron. "I think we should go and see Lockhart. Tell him what we know. He's going to try to get into the Chamber. we can tell him where we think it is and tell him it's a Basilisk in there."' (ibid.p.219) No mention of going to the Chamber themselves; just an intention of making sure that GL has some inkling of where to start. But, what do they discover? That Lockhart has gone into "rat deserting the sinking ship" mode. The extent of his lying and boasting is revealed and, after his attempt to hex the boys, he is disarmed and Harry and Ron take him to Myrtle's bathroom. They have been forced into this situation because, prior to his attempt, they might have been able to summon help from other staff but have had to take this course of action to save themselves from his attempt to attack them magically and to try to get Lockhart to the Chamber because of the threat to Ginny's life. We get down below the bathroom and Lockhart makes another attempt to silence the boys. The spell backfires on him, and leaves Harry cut off behind a wall of fallen rock. OK, now what? Should Ron go for help while Harry attempts to get back through? But does Ron know how to get back up to the bathroom through the chute? So Harry thinks on his feet and feels he needs to go forward because of the threat to Ginny's safety. We know what happens in the event. This begs the question of whether members of staff would have been able to cope with the situation in a better way. Harry at least knew something about Riddle from the diary and the inspiration to use the fang to destroy the diary and Riddle came to him. Would any other person have called Fawkes or conjured the sword of Godric Gryffindor? We do not know. But the fact seems to be that events dictated that Harry had to be the person to face off with Tom Riddle and magic of one sort or another seemed to provide the means for him to do it. Geoff http://www.aspectsofexmoor.com From eloiseherisson at aol.com Sat Dec 18 22:29:45 2004 From: eloiseherisson at aol.com (eloise_herisson) Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 22:29:45 -0000 Subject: Parenting Harry (was: Re: I don't like him much) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120066 > > Eloise: > > Although I hear Annemehr's objections to this (not quoted), it > > struck a chord in my mind. > > > > huge snip. > > > > Snape, in his own, unsympathetic way, has been trying to do > > right by Harry for some time. > > > Alla: > > Honestly, I would probably heard you before OOP. Not after > > Occlumency failure, sorry! > > > Toto: > I totally agree with Alla here. When has Snape cared if Harry lived in > a satisfying way? Eloise: Err, I don't believe I ever claimed that Snape "cared if Harry lived in a satisfying way." Toto: In ps, I could see Snape trying to save Harry as a > point, just saying *I am better than you* to James, or maybe just > because you do not stand back when someone is in danger. Eloise: Better than James is hard to achieve, given that James gave his life to save Harry. If you want to suggest a self interested motive for saving Harry's life, then I'd be more inclined to go along with the frequently suggested idea that Snape was trying to repay the life debt which many believe was incurred when James saved *his* life. Nevertheless, many people *do* stand back when others are in danger. Walking by on the other side is much easier than intervening. Yet Snape intervenes to save a boy he can't stand and ostensibly wants nothing more than to see expelled. Toto: Trying to > save someone else do not mean you are good, nor does it mean you > aren't bad. Eloise: And I made no comment on whether Snape was good or bad. It's irrelevant. Toto: >It just mean you are an active person. I think. In Cos, > would sacking Harry would have been any good to him? Eloise: To Snape or to Harry? Harry would have been safe at the Dursleys, a lot safer than he ended up being at Hogwarts. Snape suggesting that Harry is expelled is a constantly recurring theme in the books. Snape must know that it will never happen (aside from anything else I'm sure he realises Harry's significance). It doesn't mean he has to like him, though, and doesn't mean that he can't express his feelings. He either genuinely detests Harry or else gives a very convincing act of doing so. Toto: >In Poa, couldn't he have listened to Sirius? Eloise: I'm not sure what that has to do with the argument, except to point out that he was (like, I might add, the rest of the WW, including Harry, until minutes before) convinced that Sirius was the one who had betrayed the Potters and (like Dumbledore and the MOM) believed that he had escaped precisely in order to kill Harry. As far as Snape was concerned, whatever personal motives he might have had for seeking out Sirius (and I believe, as I've argued before, that he did have personal motives, which was why he didn't involve anyone else in his rescue mission) he had saved Harry's life again. And note that when he awakens, one of the first things he does is to conjure stretchers and make sure the children are taken to safety. Toto: >In my opinion, Snape is a very, very unstable man, with a very big ego. Not really an interesting >person at all, but a dangerous one. For allies, that is. Eloise: And in mine he is a very damaged man with a very fragile ego that constantly needs bolstering. Not that it matters for the purposes of this argument. I don't think I made that argument very well, because the point seems to have been missed. It is not that Snape cares for Harry in the sense of having warm feelings for him, but that IMO, he feels a duty of care towards him which particularly involves making sure that he is not over-indulged or allowed to get away with things because of any special status, that he isn't allowed to develop the kind of egocentricity that Kneasy was identifying. The point was that parenting involves discipline as well as warmth and fuzzy feelings, that it involves the setting of limits as well as the freedom to depart from them from time to time. The point was that Harry is receiving fractured parenting in the WW and like him or not, whether his methods are acceptable or not, whatever the motivation, Snape is the only one who is consistently concerned with disciplining Harry, setting limits and consciously trying to ensure that he does not become a spoilt, celebrity brat. That is what I think he sees as doing right by him, that and maintaining his physical safety. As I said in my previous post, that particular aspect of parenting seems to fall to Snape. Yes, as Annemehr pointed out, Lupin's methods of control are different and arguably better than Snape's, but Lupin is present at school with Harry for only one year out of five and at the end of it what does he do? *He gives him back the map*, the map which he was "astounded" Harry hadn't handed in. Just because he was no longer a teacher he felt no obligation to keep it from him,but by that act tacitly colluded with Harry's rule-breaking and possibly putting himself into danger again in the future. McGonagall could fulfil the role, but for some reason seems less involved, strange since she's Harry's head of house. Snape often disagrees with Dumbledore and I see his treatment of Harry as in part a conscious counterbalance to what he sees as the headmaster's over-indulgence. In fact, he almost says as much to Fudge in PoA. As for the Occlumency failure, well that's really another thread (which I haven`t followed, so apologies if I duplicate). My concern about that is less what it says about Snape's relationship with Harry than the risk he was posing for the rest of the WW. But to repeat myself, what I am arguing is that Snape has taken on one particular role within the role of parenting Harry. He can't stand the boy and he is human (all too human) and capable of being hurt/humiliated. What Harry did was a gross invasion of his privacy, after which he had every right to be livid. The incident certainly doesn't say anything about his duty to guard Harry or discipline him. Incidentally, isn't it rather interesting that the memory in the Pensieve is one that is not just humiliating for Snape, but shows James et al in a very bad light? He didn't put his memories of his miserable childhood, or humiliation on the broomstick into it , but let Harry have access to those. The memory he chose to hide from Harry was one that would be at least as hurtful to Harry as to himself and in fact the effect of seeing it was not for Harry to think the worse of Snape, but of his father. Now I know someone's going to argue that he did it deliberately, intending Harry's curiosity to get the better of him, but a face value reading suggests instead that he was protecting Harry. If he intended Harry to see it, then he shouldn't have been genuinely angry with him, but rather pleased that he had achieved his aim. Surely he would have carried on teaching him, but used every opportunity to remind him of the memory. Arguably he genuinely intended him not to see that particular memory, but Harry's prying tipped the balance too far and Snape' forbearance over the edge. ~Eloise From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sat Dec 18 22:39:07 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 22:39:07 -0000 Subject: A child is, by definition, WRONG In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120067 I snipped Geoff's nice description of the events, because my comment has to do with the very beginning of it. Harry and Ron went to the staff room to tell McGonagall what they knew about the Chamber of Secrets. Quite naturally, when they heard the announcement, they hid in a cupboard. But then they heard that Ginny had been taken to the CoS, and Lockhart was sent to look for her. Harry and Ron then went back to their dormitory, and it took them quite a while to figure out that maybe they could tell Lockhart what they knew. My question is : since they had come to the staffroom to explain about the CoS in the first place, why didn't they come out of their cupboard when they heard the news about Ginny? They knew where the entrance to the Chamber was, they knew what the monster was, and yet they kept all that secret! Here they were, with all the teachers assembled in one place and a very strong incentive to do something, and yet they didn't do *anything*. This is quite out of character for Harry, IMO. Del From lexical74 at yahoo.com Sat Dec 18 23:02:39 2004 From: lexical74 at yahoo.com (Brian Brinkman) Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 23:02:39 -0000 Subject: Harry the Untouchable Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120068 Since it might have been discussed already or it might be just plain wrong, I'll keep it short. Related to the ESE!Lupin discussion, I wonder if, when, Lupin almost gives Harry a reassuring touch and then "thinks better of it" (or something like that), this is a hint that he can't touch Harry, akin to Vernon backing off? Brian From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Sat Dec 18 23:44:53 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 23:44:53 -0000 Subject: You're in the Army, now. wasFalse Alarm? Was:Re: Adults "failing" Harry (in tP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120069 > Del : > How do we know that Sirius knew about the Prophecy and that he wanted > to tell Harry about it? How do we know that anyone apart from DD knew > about the Prophecy but that they were ordered by DD not to mention it? Neri: I've been interested for some time in this question precisely. It is clear that the Order members knew that there is something in the DoM that Voldy wants very badly, something "he didn't have last time" as Sirius says in the beginning of the year. They were doing guard duty outside that door for ten months and were seriously attacked twice while doing so. The questions are: did they know that it was a prophecy, and if so, did they know what it says? The best indication that they knew it was a prophecy comes from the battle in the DoM: OotP, Ch. 35: "Harry, take the prophecy, grab Neville and run!"' Sirius yelled, dashing to meet Bellatrix. All Sirius can see is a glass orb clutched in Harry's hand. How does he know that it is a prophecy? How does he know that it's "THE prophecy"? He hardly had had time to deduce it in the storming battle. He couldn't have heard it from DD just before the battle because he wasn't in contact with him. It is unlikely that he heard the DEs in the DoM refering to it as the prophecy - when Macnair was telling Harry to give him the prophecy, just before that, he "growled in Harry's ear", and seconds after that when Dolohov shouted "Accio proph ? " he was cut by Sirius himself. How did Sirius know that he must save not merely Harry but also the "proph ? "? The logical explanation is that he had known for some time that Voldy was after a prophecy. Did the Order members also knew what the prophecy says? I couldn't find any certain canon for that, but my guess is that DD told them the first half of the prophecy. There was no reason to keep it a secret from them since Voldemort already knew it. OTOH there was a very good reason to tell them, since they may guard Harry better if they know the whole WW depends on keeping him alive. Perhaps Mundungus didn't know about it when he had gone to his business opportunity, but after the shock of the dementor attack DD probably decided to tell the Order, because three days later "a surprising number of Order members volunteer" to guard Harry in his way to HQ. And they all (well, except Snape) guard him adamantly during the following year, even those who did not know him personally and aren't given to hero worship, such as Moody, Kingsley and Tonks. Also, when Harry tells Sirius and Lupin that Snape had stopped the Occlumency lessons they are horrified, and Lupin says sternly "Harry, there is nothing so important as you learning Occlumency! Do you understand me? Nothing!" For Harry, Lupin comes across here as the typical overprotective, slightly hysterical grownup. But knowing Lupin as the master of understatement, for him to say anything so forcefully he must mean it quite literally: "the most important thing for the war and the future of the whole WW is for Harry to learn Occlumency". At least to me this sounds as more than just worrying about Harry's personal safety. Neri From khinterberg at yahoo.com Sat Dec 18 23:47:53 2004 From: khinterberg at yahoo.com (khinterberg) Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 23:47:53 -0000 Subject: Questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120070 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "chrusotoxos" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "vmonte" wrote: > > > > Some Harry Potter Questions I Want Answers to: > > > 3. Is the voice that Harry believes to be his father telling his > > mother to run (dementor scene in PoA) really James? Or, is it > > another case of mistaken identity? > > It is. Lupin is sure of that, and he would know how things happened from Dumbledore. And who else could have been? > khinterberg now: Actually, we don't know if Lupin is sure of that or not. This is where the infamous quote comes in when Harry says that he heard his dad when he was learning the patronus, and Lupin answers him in a strange voice. From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Sat Dec 18 23:39:54 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 15:39:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Harry the Untouchable In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041218233954.95692.qmail@web53110.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120071 --- Brian Brinkman wrote: > > Since it might have been discussed already or it > might be just plain > wrong, I'll keep it short. Related to the ESE!Lupin > discussion, I > wonder if, when, Lupin almost gives Harry a > reassuring touch and > then "thinks better of it" (or something like that), > this is a hint > that he can't touch Harry, akin to Vernon backing > off? > Juli: I just thought that Remus didn't want to get to close to Harry, he didn't want to show him how much he cares and that he was best friends with his dad and Sirius. Lupin has touched Harry: During Patronus class, at OoP when the advance guard gets to Privet Drive. I believe Lily's protection is against anyone (specially Voldemort) who tries to kill him, not just hurt him. Remember Quirell touched Harry before he got possessed by LV. Juli __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Dress up your holiday email, Hollywood style. Learn more. http://celebrity.mail.yahoo.com From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Dec 19 00:07:33 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 00:07:33 -0000 Subject: Can Occlumency be taught ?(was:Umbridge and Harry's Temptations) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120072 Del replies : > Could it be simply because Occlumency cannot be taught? Snape describes it as "an obscure branch of magic, but a highly useful one". Useful indeed! In a world where wizards can use Imperio and Legilimency on each other, you'd think Occlumency would be a compulsory subject for all wizards to learn. But it's not. And why would that be? I can think of only 2 reasons : 1. It's Dark Magic. But unless we haven't been told everything about it, I fail to see why it would be classified as such. 2. It can't be taught. Just like resisting the Imperius Curse can't be taught. Maybe Occlumens are born, not made, just like Metamorphmagi. Harry resisting the Imperius Curse the year before might have hinted at him being an Occlumens. I would also like to repeat something that has been said over and over again, but that I find important : when teaching the kids to resist Imperio, Crouch!Moody didn't do anything but put them under the Curse. Being put under the curse and shaking it seems to be the only way to learn to resist it. Similarly, it could very well be that learning Occlumency can be done only be clearing one's mind and shaking a Legilimency curse. Alla: Well, sure our lack of knowledge is one of the main problems in evaluating whether Snape taught Occlumency correctly OR as you put the question "Whether it could be taught at all" I tend to think that it could be taught, because Dumbledore insisted that Snape TAUGHT Harry occlumency, but of course we don't know what conversation Dumbledore had with Snape prior to starting lessons. It could be as well that Dumbledore told Snape "Just put Harry under Legilimens and see what happens next" :o) I cannot say that it is impossible, but since I still believe in Dumbledore's good nature, I tend to disagree with it. We don't know how real Moody would have taught Unforgivables in class. Who knows, maybe he would have given them some preparation exercises prior to Imperio the class. What am I getting at? Oh, yes. This way of teaching smells TO ME of Voldemort's way of teaching and I hope that occlumency can be taught. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Dec 19 00:20:28 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 00:20:28 -0000 Subject: Did Snape know WHY he must teach Harry Occlumency? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120073 In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: According to DD, Snape only discovered about Harry's recurrent corridor dreams when he started teaching him. This means that the ONLY occurence of Harry-LV contact Snape might have known about previously was the Snake Dream. Moreover, we don't know whether Snape knew about the Prophecy and the fact that LV was trying to get it. When Harry asked him what was in the DoM, Snape told him that there was nothing there that concerns him. Was he outright lying ? > If Snape didn't know about the Prophecy, he couldn't understand how crucial it was that Harry be protected from mental invasion by LV. Was Snape also outright lying when he told Harry that he was "neither special nor important" ? If Snape knew about the Prophecy, he couldn't say such a thing. And if he knew, why did he lie? It was counter-productive to assure Harry that there was nothing special about him, to say the least. Could it be that Snape did NOT know why Harry needed to learn Occlumency? Could it be that Snape was only teaching Harry reluctantly because DD told him to, but without telling him why? > Alla: Del, bear with me on this one, OK? I don't know your position on the following question - do you believe that Snape is in many ways Dumbledore right hand in anti- Voldemort's efforts? Because if you do, and that is kind of my stand on it, I don't think we can doubt that Snape knows EVERYTHING about Prophecy. If you don't think that Snape is Dumbledore's right hand, then sure, it is quite possible to assume that he did not know about Prophecy. I also tend to share the speculation that Snape was the one who originally overheard the Prophecy, but that is just speculation of course. Now, about the questions you asked - well, yeah, I think that Snape was outright lying when he told Harry that he was neither special nor important. Why would he do that? Ummm, because he is Snape. :o) Since I see him as someone who is extremely jealous of Harry's popularity and someone who tends to humiliate Harry the first chance he gets, well he had a lot of chances during Occlumency and he used all of them, IMO. To make a long story short - NO, I don't think it is likely that Snape did not know about Prophecy, but I could be wrong of course. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Dec 19 00:28:35 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 00:28:35 -0000 Subject: Parenting Harry (was: Re: I don't like him much) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120074 >> Eloise: snip. The point was that Harry is receiving fractured parenting in the WW and like him or not, whether his methods are acceptable or not, whatever the motivation, Snape is the only one who is consistently concerned with disciplining Harry, setting limits and consciously trying to ensure that he does not become a spoilt, celebrity brat. That is what I think he sees as doing right by him, that and maintaining his physical safety. Alla: OK, just a brief comment. I hear you, Eloise, but see I don't think that day to day humilation and sadistic enjoynment of such humiliation equals strict discipline. In my mind strict disciplinarian does not indeed show warm, fuzzy feelings towards the child, but is being FAIR. That is why I see Minerva as being such, but definitely not Snape. It is one thing if Snape was running his mouth at Harry when Harry deserved it (I would still say that half of his comments have got to go), but it is another thing, when Snape just grabs the moment and verbally abuses the boy. All of it is just my opinion, of course. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Dec 19 00:47:44 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 00:47:44 -0000 Subject: Yet another defense of Snape's Occlumency lessons (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120075 > Dungrollin, previously: huge snip. My biggest problem with the idea that Snape didn't teach Harry Occlumency properly, is Snape's motivation. Why on earth should he deliberately omit vital instructions? Nobody (IIRC) seems to have suggested a plausible motivation ? but I doubt that any > will go as far as postulating ESE!Snape either. Alla replied: Eh? Why not? For the record, I don't believe in ESE! Snape, but quite strong case can be put together in favor of ESE!Snape, I think. > Dungrollin now: That's exactly my point ? you don't believe in ESE!Snape ? so give me a good motivation for him deliberately withholding vital information about the proper way to learn Occlumency. That's what you were arguing before, wasn't it? Alla: LOL! I should not have mentioned that I don't believe in ESE!Snape. I should have just argued it. So, even though I don't believe in ESE!Snape, I can easily imagine ESE!Snape. So, let's say he is still playing double or triple spy, for example. No, I myself am not convinced. What I do believe happened is that Snape let his emotions took the best out of him . He was simply incapable to teach occlumency to Harry properly, whatever it was. Of course, it is possible that we will learn that there was no other way, but for now, I doubt it. Harry after his first lesson looked TO ME as the victim of the assault, not as student who ended the lesson with the teacher. Dungrollin: snip. IMO, all he can be accused of is being Snape. Alla: IMO, that is plenty. :o) From snow15145 at yahoo.com Sun Dec 19 02:21:59 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 02:21:59 -0000 Subject: Yet another defense of Snape's Occlumency lessons (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120076 Alla: First, let me say it first Harry did not practice. He did not. No question about it. It was Harry's mistake. I am arguing though that Snape's lessons gave Harry almost no help and a lot of harm. In fact, I was having flashbacks to their first potion lesson, where (in my opinion only) Snape went out of his way to make Harry hate him. >Snip< Instead of telling Harry to breath, to relax, I don't know, do something that might HELP Harry, Snape becomes hysterical himself (in my opinion only) "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 that easily ? weak people, in other words, they stand no chance against their powers! He will penetrate your mind with absurd ease, Potter!" "I am not weak, "said Harry in low voice, fury now pumping through him so that eh thought he might attack Snape in a moment... "Then prove it! Master yourself!" spat Snape. "Control your anger, discipline your mind! We shall try again! Get ready now! Legilimens!" ? p.536 Snape did not "said" that last quote, he "spat" it. Again, I think he became hysterical. Snow: Don't you think it would be almost essential for Harry to learn the Occlumency lessons under adverse conditions? After all, Harry would have to learn to be in control of his emotions or overcome his hatred to use Occlumency properly against Voldemort. Voldemort isn't going to stand there saying, "are you ready Harry, I'm going to attack your mind". Snape tries to show Harry that wearing your heart on your sleeve is to make yourself vulnerable to Voldemort and Snape was right! Voldemort learned that Harry had feelings for Sirius above all else and used him to lore Harry to the Ministry. Harry has not been pro-active against Voldemort in the past, meaning that Harry has not, after all he has been through, realized the severity or inevitability of having to face Voldemort year-after-year and take it seriously enough to want to learn anything that could possibly stop him, even if it is from Snape. Harry could use a little verbal pounding to help ensure his own safety. Harry is taking this Occlumency teaching lightly and Snape is there to remind him that Voldemort is a ticking bomb, after all isn't Harry their only recourse against Voldemort? How many people could die as a result of Harry's noncompliance? (Harry just doesn't think, period, even though Voldemort has persued only him) Harry acts on his knowledge at hand, which has been severely minimized by Dumbledore's orders not to let Harry know too much. I do agree that Snape should tone down his snide remarks but you have to agree that it does catch Harry's attention (which is like talking to the child that is humming to itself when you are trying desperately to get your point across). When Harry does ask a question and Snape attempts to answer it, Harry interrupts which sends Snape into a respect your elders' mode. Snape is trying to teach Harry within the boundaries of what Dumbledore wants Harry to know, which makes it that much harder for Snape, Harry is uncooperative because it is Snape who is the teacher and the end result is oil and water. Dumbledore excuses Snape's behavior, to Harry, as not letting go of the past with Harry's father but Harry's non-compliance is overlooked when Dumbledore tells Harry it "mattered not that you could not close your mind. It was your heart that saved you." I guess all those fruitless Occlumency lessons didn't matter at all unless they were to teach Harry that he doesn't know everything, that he acts in haste with disregard that he needs to trust, that he is inevitably confronting Voldemort and to do this he must listen and learn even in the most adverse environment for his own protection. Snow From a_b_desert_king at hotmail.com Sun Dec 19 02:36:29 2004 From: a_b_desert_king at hotmail.com (a_b_desert_king) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 02:36:29 -0000 Subject: Who knew what ? (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120077 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "fkilc" wrote: > > Del: > > > > 2. Who in the Order knows about Harry's dreams of the corridor? They all know about his Snake dream, but do we know that *anyone* knows about his recurrent corridor dream? > > > > Francois said > > Well, Snape most likely did, since he became quite furious at Harry > for "dreaming" that he was running down the corridor (remember that > Harry was quite surprised at Snape's anger because he seemed more > angry than when Harry was able to protect himself and get flashes of Snape's memory). > > snip Heather here: I'm going to throw this one into the fray. I personally always thought that this situation was *not* a case when Snape broke into Harry's thoughts. I think that LV hit Harry with a 'dream' right at the moment when Snape was about to Legilimens him... there are several reasons for this feeling: 1) Snape only counts to two before he is interrupted: (all quotes from OotP Am hardcover version pg 522-523) "'On the count of three, then,' said Snape, raising his wand once more. 'One - two-' Harry did not have time to gather himself together and attempt to clear his mind before Snape cried, 'Legilimens!'" Interruptions are key in this series, and we never actually hear Snape yell Legilimens (from Harry's pov)- we only assume that he did. 2) Harry *finally* gets through the door - he has never accomplished this up to now. "The door had flown open! He was through it *at last*, (emphasis mine) inside a black-walled, black-floored circular room lit with blue-flamed candles, and there were more doors all around him -...." To me this indicates that he is having another 'dream' which takes him farther than ever before. How can this be a memory Snape is intruding upon if he has never made it this far before now? He cannot have a memory of a place he's never even seen in his dreams! 3)Snape seems confused/angry at Harry falling to the floor: "Harry opened his eyes. He was flat on his back again with no memory of having got there;.... 'Explain yourself!' said Snape, who was standing over him, looking furious." Snape doesn't ask Harry specific questions as he has in the past, just 'Explain yourself'. Seems like maybe he didn't actually see Harry's thoughts that time; maybe he's only asking why Harry fell to the floor (perhaps he thought it was Harry's way of avoiding further mind searching) 4)Harry doesn't know what happened - usually he's at least somewhat aware of what is going on albeit not really in control of what he is thinking or doing. This time he's truly out of sorts - similar to the way he feels when he wakes from his 'dreams' at night. "'I... dunno what happened,' said Harry truthfully, standing up." It's at this point that Snape changes the subject by hurling insults at HP (I mean - what else can he do? He doesn't know what just happened and feels out of control of the situation - what better way to assert your superiority than to put down your inferiors...) and then suddenly they are interrupted (interruptions again) by Umbridge's attempt to remove Trelawney from the building. I think that the reason why Snape was so angry and upset about this particular session was not only that he discovered HP was having dreams about 'the Dark Lord' but that he was witness to one of these dreams - and what more dangerous situation for a double agent to be in than one where he might get found out by the more dangerous leader? Perhaps he was also upset because he realizes why DD wants him to teach Harry rather than doing it himself. The dream he intruded on before this was of LV talking with Rookwood in the dark room - and Snape knows HP could *never* have met Rookwood before this since Rookwood has been in Azkaban since HP was about 1 yr old. I know that some time ago some people theorized that perhaps Snape had been present in that room and was worried that HP might see him in one of his dreams. This might also be a reason for Snape to be furious at learning of the dreams. Anyway, it's just my thoughts on this particular session, for whatever they are worth :) Heather From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Dec 19 02:36:38 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 02:36:38 -0000 Subject: Yet another defense of Snape's Occlumency lessons (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120078 > Snow: Don't you think it would be almost essential for Harry to learn the Occlumency lessons under adverse conditions? After all, Harry would have to learn to be in control of his emotions or overcome his hatred to use Occlumency properly against Voldemort. Voldemort isn't going to stand there saying, "are you ready Harry, I'm going to attack your mind". Alla: Hi, Snow! I apologise, but I am not very receptive to this argument. Dumbledore and Snape had a chance to see that Harry does NOT learn well in Snape's class under adverse conditions, IMO. What make them decide that he would learn this time, I am not sure. Snow: snip. I do agree that Snape should tone down his snide remarks but you have to agree that it does catch Harry's attention (which is like talking to the child that is humming to itself when you are trying > desperately to get your point across). Alla: Actually, I don't agree. Sorry! Snape snide remarks catch Harry's attention in the negative way. It does not force him to study, it only forces him to mistrust Snape even more and hate him even more. Just my opinion, of course. From greatraven at hotmail.com Sun Dec 19 03:45:42 2004 From: greatraven at hotmail.com (sbursztynski) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 03:45:42 -0000 Subject: Yet another defense of Snape's Occlumency lessons (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120079 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > > Dungrollin, previously: > > > Dungrollin: > > snip. > > IMO, all he can be accused of is being Snape. > > > Alla: > > IMO, that is plenty. :o) Sue: Okay, here is my opinion for whatever it's worth, and not a direct reply to all these posts. I think it was a mistake, a big, big mistake, to ask Snape to do this job in the first place. DD knows, has to know, that Snape and Harry hate each other. There was no way this was going to work out, no matter how many breathing exercises or whatever, Harry was given, if it was given by Snape. He knows occlumency and probably doesn't have much patience with trying to explain it to someone who doesn't know it, no matter who they are. And after five years of mutual hatred, he isn't going to be able to teach Harry anything this important, no matter what he does. Harry could have managed it with Dumbledore, whom he did trust, except that by that time, he was starting to be furious with DD too. But if DD had said, "Empty your mind of emotions, " Harry would have asked, "Okay, but how?" When Snape says it, his response is basically, "Get stuffed!" He doesn't see why he needs to learn this stuff and nobody has sat him down to explain it. Well, Snape did explain it, but Harry wasn't listening and Snape really didn't care if he got the point or not, as he didn't want to do the job in the first place. Somebody needs to knock those two heads together and say, "Listen, you two, you can hate each other all you want later, but right now you have to co-operate, okay?" From imamommy at sbcglobal.net Sun Dec 19 05:04:11 2004 From: imamommy at sbcglobal.net (imamommy at sbcglobal.net) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 05:04:11 -0000 Subject: A child is, by definition, WRONG In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120080 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: > > Meri wrote: > " Case in point: the Dursleys. For a decade Harry lived with him and > learned that he couldn't look to adults for help or care or trust. > They certainly never acted in Harry's best intersts, whether it be by > practically starving him, forcing to sleep in a tiny cupboard, > punnishments that kept him locked up for days at a time or barring his > windows. Ten years of these kinds of experiences will train a kid not > to trust grownups to do what is best. " > > Del replies: > I understand your point, but : > > 1. Harry can talk, walk, write, read, and so on. So the Dursleys did > get quite a few important things right. > > 2. The extreme punishments you mentioned were for extreme situations. > They were in no way part of his routine life. > > 3. Don't mix up the examples. Barring the windows and keeping him > locked up for days happened *after* Harry started going to Hogwarts, > and they were always related with magic. They weren't part of his > pre-Hogwarts growing-up (as implied by "ten years of these kinds of > experience") imamommy: No, sorry, Del. "Once, Aunt Petunia, tired of Harry coming back from the Barbers looking as though he hadn't been at all, had taken a pair of kitchen scissors and cut his hair so short he was almost bald...Next morning, however, he had gotten up to find his hair exactly as it had been before Aunt Petunia had sheared it off. He had been given a week in his cupboard for this, even though he tried to explain that he couldn't explain how it had grown back so quickly." (SS, p24, scholastic) "...he'd gotten into terrible trouble for being found on the roof of the school kitchens...But all he'd tried to do (as he shouted at Uncle Vernon through the locked door of his cupboard) was jump behind the big trash cans outside the kitchen doors.: (SS, p25, Scholastic) "The escape of the Brazilian boa constrictor earned Harry his longest- ever punishment. By the time he was allowed out of his cupboard again, the summer holidays had started..." (SS, p31, Scholastic) imamommy: All of these examples were *before* Harry's Hogwarts letter came. It sounds like they were rather common, especially if we include this quote: "Sometimes, when he strained his memory during long hours in his cupboard, he came up with a strange vision..." (SS, p29, Scholastic) Sounds to me like he spent a lot of time in that cupboard. One could argue that these were "extreme situations," but I think punishing somebody for something they can't control is pathetic, like a parent shaming a child for not going potty in the right place. Generally, I think the Dursleys are (at the least)very ignorant parents. I disagree that a child is wrong by definition. A child is entitled to make age-appropriate choices. They may not be the same choices an adult would make, but that doesn't make them wrong. I never remember, even when I was, thinking, "I am a small child. I'd better do what Mommy tells me to, because she's so much older and wiser." I only remember feeling like I was grown-up, within my own world. Even more so when I was a teenager. The trick is to place choices before a child, tell him what you would choose and what consequences there may be, and then let him make his decision and live with the consequences. This is scary as a parent, especially with teenagers, but forcing them to do something only ensures that they will run the other way. imamommy imamommy From snow15145 at yahoo.com Sun Dec 19 05:15:49 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 05:15:49 -0000 Subject: Yet another defense of Snape's Occlumency lessons (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120081 Snow previously: Don't you think it would be almost essential for Harry to learn the Occlumency lessons under adverse conditions? After all, Harry would have to learn to be in control of his emotions or overcome his hatred to use Occlumency properly against Voldemort. Voldemort isn't going to stand there saying, "are you ready Harry, I'm going to attack your mind". Alla: Hi, Snow! I apologise, but I am not very receptive to this argument. Dumbledore and Snape had a chance to see that Harry does NOT learn well in Snape's class under adverse conditions, IMO. What make them decide that he would learn this time, I am not sure. Snow: Hi, Alla! I don't like to butt heads with you because I can realize where you are seeing this from, and I would tend to agree, but I don't think that learning Occlumency was necessarily the driving point in the lessons. Harry needed to learn the severity of listening and trusting Snape to overcome. Harry was the most unwilling participant. Snow (me) previously: I do agree that Snape should tone down his snide remarks but you have to agree that it does catch Harry's attention (which is like talking to the child that is humming to itself when you are trying > desperately to get your point across). Alla: Actually, I don't agree. Sorry! Snape snide remarks catch Harry's attention in the negative way. It does not force him to study, it only forces him to mistrust Snape even more and hate him even more. Just my opinion, of course. Snow: Yes! But it makes him listen. It seems to be the only chances of making the boy pay any attention to what Snape has to say: The insult: OOP Pg 530 "You do not understand fine distinctions. It is one of the shortcomings that makes you such a lamentable potion-maker." Now the teaching (after catching his attention through the insult): "It is true, however, that those who have mastered Legilemency are able, under certain conditions, to delve into the minds of their victims and to interpret their findings correctly. The Dark Lord, for instance, almost always knows when somebody is lying to him. Only those skilled at Occlumency are able to shut down those feelings and memories that contradict the lie " Harry is being taught but the recipient is not willing to trust the teacher. From imamommy at sbcglobal.net Sun Dec 19 05:21:35 2004 From: imamommy at sbcglobal.net (imamommy at sbcglobal.net) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 05:21:35 -0000 Subject: Parenting Harry (was: Re: I don't like him much) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120082 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "eloise_herisson" wrote: >Eloise wrote: Snip > Lupin is present at school with Harry for only one year out of five > and at the end of it what does he do? *He gives him back the map*, > the map which he was "astounded" Harry hadn't handed in. Just > because he was no longer a teacher he felt no obligation to keep it > from him,but by that act tacitly colluded with Harry's rule- breaking > and possibly putting himself into danger again in the future. > McGonagall could fulfil the role, but for some reason seems less > involved, strange since she's Harry's head of house. imamommy: Well, he was "astounded" because Harry knows Sirius Black is (supposedly) hunting him. The next sentence references the attack on Gryffindor tower after Neville lost the passwords. After the danger has passed, Lupin doesn't feel badly because there are no more mass murderers looking for Harry. I think he is also overcome by nostalgia, and wants Harry to have this map that James and his friends made, and used together. imamommy From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Sun Dec 19 06:17:36 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 06:17:36 -0000 Subject: Yet another defense of Snape's Occlumency lessons (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120083 Dungrollin: >>> So don't blame it all on Snape, particularly when DD and Harry have both accepted the blame for their various mistakes.<<< SSSusan: I want to start out by going on record as saying that I don't blame Snape totally. Harry & DD share in the blame, as does the mere fact that Snape & Harry have a 4 ?-year history at this point in which they've developed a bit of a vicious cycle of expecting the worst and therefore bringing on the worst in each other. I also want to note that I read another of Dung's posts downthread and saw the statement that she was mostly trying to point out that Snape didn't *deliberately* choose to teach Potter poorly [if I've paraphrased correctly]. This I agree with. I do not believe that Snape told himself he wanted Harry to fail or any such thing. That said, this particular part of Dungrollin's original post really struck me -- >>>My biggest problem with the idea that Snape didn't teach Harry Occlumency properly, is Snape's motivation. Why on earth should he deliberately omit vital instructions? Nobody (IIRC) seems to have suggested a plausible motivation ? but I doubt that any will go as far as postulating ESE!Snape either. On the other hand, Snape does have good and plausible motivations for teaching Harry properly: 1. It's Snape's job to find out what Voldy and the DEs are up to, not Harry's ? let's stop him getting ideas above his station. 2. Voldy may well be able to get at DD through Harry unless Harry is able to shut him out of his mind. And Snape is loyal to DD. 3. Voldy may well be able to make Harry do things, (putting Harry in danger) unless Harry is able to shut him out of his mind. And Harry is the only one with the chance of beating Voldy for good.<<< SSSusan: I am reacting particularly to the bit about why Snape wouldn't teach Harry properly, especially since Harry's "the only one with the chance of beating Voldy for good." My comment ties in with both the Occlumency situation and with Potions and is my biggest complaint about Snape with Harry as his student: While Snape doesn't deliberately try to make Harry fail, he doesn't ask himself whether his methods are working with this all-important student either. If it's REALLY that important that Harry succeed, whether it's Potions or Occlumency, because Harry is the Big Weapon in VW2, and if Snape is a White Hat or at least a man who wants Voldy taken down, then WHY can he not "retrain" himself to actually assess his teaching methods with this one bratty kid and determine if they're working? And as they're *not* working well, perhaps he should figure out what else he might do? Should Snape have to adjust his methods for one kid? *Maybe* not, in a normal class under normal circumstances. But Harry's not yer average student, and it's not a normal circumstance just now. This is primarily where I fault Snape, in Occlumency & all-around. Snape seems to feel it's more important to make sure Harry doesn't think too highly of himself than that he, Snape, figure out the best way to teach him. Alla: >>>Here is my question to you. If indeed feeling worse after the lesson is unavolidable side effect, which we have no proof of, why, oh why did Snape not WARNED Harry that he WILL feel worse?<<< Dungrollin: >> Now that's a good point, but by the same argument, why on earth didn't Harry go to the next Occlumency lesson saying "I felt really dreadful after the last lesson, is that normal?"<< Annemehr: > I suppose Harry assumed he would have been snarled at for admitting to more scar pain and headaches, just as he was for seeing the DoM and the room where Voldemort talked to Rookwood. It would be like admitting to Snape that he was failing.< SSSusan: I think that Annemehr's on the right track. If *you* were Harry and you were taking Occlumency with *Snape* at this point in your relationship with him, would you come in and say, "Hey, you know what? I felt like shit after that last lesson. Do you think something's wrong?" No way I could hear that coming from Harry. He'd be too sure that Snape would just yell at him. I mean, look at these two exchanges: "How come I saw through the snake's eyes if it's Voldemort's thoughts I am sharing?" "Do not say the dark Lord's name!" spat Snape" "I ? am ? making ? an- effort," he said through clenched teeth." "I told you to empty yourself of emotion!" "Yeah? Well, I am finding that hard at the moment," Harry snarled. "Then you will find yourself easy prey for the Dark Lord!" said Snape savagely. WHERE in these two scenes does Snape help him out? Harry wants to know something vital ? he's asking questions for once!!! ? and Snape just yells at him for saying Voldemort's name and ignores the question. Then, when Harry admits he's having a hard time, Snape yells at him *savagely*. This is hardly going to engender in Harry a feeling that it's okay or good or wise to tell Snape he's struggling or to ask further questions. Which leads rather to Snow's comment: >>> Don't you think it would be almost essential for Harry to learn the Occlumency lessons under adverse conditions? After all, Harry would have to learn to be in control of his emotions or overcome his hatred to use Occlumency properly against Voldemort. Voldemort isn't going to stand there saying, "are you ready Harry, I'm going to attack your mind".<<< SSSusan: My answer is, simply, NO, I don't think that. There are some things people can learn by jumping right into them. But where there's an option, this ex-teacher thinks it's wisest to opt for a slow start w/ some measure of success before moving into the difficult, real- life situation. Kind of like Lupin's boggart!dementor simulation before Harry had to encounter the real thing. It helps to understand the process, figure out what works, get a little confidence built up, then up the ante to what it might be like w/ Voldy. Siriusly Snapey Susan From bob.oliver at cox.net Sun Dec 19 07:08:00 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 07:08:00 -0000 Subject: Adults "failing" Harry (was: Themes in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120084 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: > > > Del replies : > It seems obvious to me that this is PRECISELY the reason DD didn't > tell Harry about the Prophecy : because he didn't want to put even > more emotional stress on him. > DD is well aware that the boy doesn't have much of a support network. > But there's nothing he can do about it : there's simply nobody > available to parent Harry. So DD tries to do the only thing he can do > : preserve Harry's sanity by not putting more stress than necessary on > him. Tell me : what ELSE could he have done ? > > Del Well, practiced a little forsight perhaps to avoid this very situation? Tried to arrange better parenting for Harry in advance? Been more open with everyone involved instead of playing, rather ineffectually, at being Dumbledore the Great and Mysterious? In his defense, perhaps he did attempt to do these things and failed. Maybe there was something about the arrangement with the Dursleys that prevented him from insisting that Harry have support from the WW. Maybe he intended for Lupin to become a parental figure for Harry but was foiled by the events of PoA. Maybe, maybe, maybe... But the fact is, Dumbledore has let a lot of very delicate balls drop to the ground during his juggling act. Now, one can argue that it's unfair to expect him to deal with all of these delicate and complex issues. But he has taken the responsibility on himself by the decisions he has made, and therefore the onus of failure belongs to him. To use a military analogy - which I acknowledge not everyone will find appropriate - a Commander is judged responsible for what happens to those under him. That is often harsh, and even often unfair. But it is absolutely necessary. Those who want to wield profound power over others, and those who DO wield such power whether they want to or not, must understand that the fall out of their decisions adheres to them (at least in theory, if all too often not in reality). Lupinlore From gbannister10 at aol.com Sun Dec 19 08:01:03 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 08:01:03 -0000 Subject: A child is, by definition, WRONG In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120085 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: Del: > I snipped Geoff's nice description of the events, because my comment > has to do with the very beginning of it. > > Harry and Ron went to the staff room to tell McGonagall what they knew > about the Chamber of Secrets. Quite naturally, when they heard the > announcement, they hid in a cupboard. But then they heard that Ginny > had been taken to the CoS, and Lockhart was sent to look for her. > Harry and Ron then went back to their dormitory, and it took them > quite a while to figure out that maybe they could tell Lockhart what > they knew. > > My question is : since they had come to the staffroom to explain about > the CoS in the first place, why didn't they come out of their cupboard > when they heard the news about Ginny? They knew where the entrance to > the Chamber was, they knew what the monster was, and yet they kept all > that secret! Here they were, with all the teachers assembled in one > place and a very strong incentive to do something, and yet they didn't > do *anything*. This is quite out of character for Harry, IMO. Geoff: Oh dear, Harry's finished up in a no-win situation. He and Ron know that Lockhart is going to deal with the matter, although I suspect they may have misgivings knowing his track record for getting it wrong. So they are leaving matters in his hands... Even so: 'It was probably the worst day of Harry's life. He, Ron, Fred and George sat together in a corner of the Gryffindor common room, unable to say anything to each other. Percy wasn't there. He had gone to send an owl to Mr. and Mrs. Weasley, then shut himself up in his dormitory..... ..Harry could see the sun sinking, blood red below the skyline. This was the worst he had ever felt. If only there was something they could do. Anything....' (then Ron's remark, quoted in message 120065) '...Because Harry couldn't think of anything else to do and because the wanted to be doing something, he agreed...' (COS "The Chamber of Secrets" pp.218-219 UK edition) Harry has a "strong incentive to do something" but is at a loss as to what. Isn't this the reaction of anyone faced with this sort of problem - a family member seriously ill, a friend's sudden bereavement, a natural disaster - what do we do? Where do we start? This is further support for my suggestion that this incident is not "hero Harry rides again". The whole affair is event-driven. Harry and Ron wanted initially to tell Professor McGonagall; events dictated against that. They wanted to tell Lockhart; events dictated against that. Could they have gone back from the Chamber to get help?; events dictated against that. Geoff http://www.aspectsofexmoor.com From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Sun Dec 19 00:46:13 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 16:46:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041219004613.15474.qmail@web53102.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120086 vmonte wrote: Some Harry Potter Questions I Want Answers to: 3. Is the voice that Harry believes to be his father telling his mother to run (dementor scene in PoA) really James? Or, is it another case of mistaken identity? chrusotoxos wrote: It is. Lupin is sure of that, and he would know how things happened from Dumbledore. And who else could have been? khinterberg replied: Actually, we don't know if Lupin is sure of that or not. This is where the infamous quote comes in when Harry says that he heard his dad when he was learning the patronus, and Lupin answers him in a strange voice. Juli now: I believe Remus answered in a weird voice because he was in shock, James was one of his closest friends and Harry had just heard him the moment before he died. I think he acted just like Harry did when Moody showed him the picture of the first Order of the Phoenix. Juli __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Easier than ever with enhanced search. Learn more. http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250 From senderellabrat at aol.com Sun Dec 19 08:22:47 2004 From: senderellabrat at aol.com (Sen J) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 08:22:47 -0000 Subject: A child is, by definition, WRONG In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120087 > Meri: **Sen Snipping** In SS people criticize Harry for going after the Stone. But > remember, first he tried to go to Dumbledore and explain the > situation, and then he confessed everything to MM. But DD was gone > from the castle (as part of Quirell!Mort's plan) and MM *didn't > believe him*. He told her the truth and instead of taking him > seriously she dismissed him. And he was right: someone was trying to > steal the Stone and if Harry hadn't made it there when he did, there > is every possiblilty that Quirell!Mort would have figured out how to > get the Stone from the Mirror of Erised. Sen: You make an excellent point Meri. How many times have we seen Harry actually *try* to go to an adult about something..anything... and *not* get shot down? These instances on top of the distrust the Dursleys' have ..beaten (for lack of a better word) into him would make anyone take matters into their own hands. If you strongly believe something and you've got the evidence (or even a series of suspicions that add up like in SS) and nobody else listens.. aren't you going to do something instead of sitting idly by? Sen From bob.oliver at cox.net Sun Dec 19 08:32:46 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 08:32:46 -0000 Subject: Yet another defense of Snape's Occlumency lessons (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120088 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: > Del replies : > > 1. How EVER was Snape supposed to know that Harry's scar would hurt > more after the Occlumency lessons??? Nobody has ever dealt with such a > scar, and Harry didn't tell Snape what he was feeling. Maybe if he'd > told him, Snape would have been worried. > And yet Dumbledore seems to know a lot about it, and to have expected certain things. Now, he may just be guessing, but his knowledge would seem to indicate that such things are not at all unknown in the Wizarding World. If so Snape, as a "superb Occlumens," should be aware of such precedents and warn Harry about them. > 2. This pain could be akin to sore muscles. Muscles hurt after an > intense workout, but they are not weakened by it, quite the opposite. In this case Snape CERTAINLY should have forseen such a development and warned Harry. > > 3. The pain could have been an indication that the lessons were highly > effective. It could have been an indication that LV was now unable to > access Harry's mind. To explain it figuratively : maybe LV was trying > to enter Harry's mind and found the door closed, when it was usually > wide open. So he would start pummelling the door, which would hurt Harry. > Once again, in this case Snape should have clearly forseen the result and warned Harry what to expect. > Alla wrote : > " I don't think that Snape will deliberately betray the Order, but he > may let hsi emotions rile up again and by accidentdo somethign which > will put Order in danger." > > Del replies : > You do realise that Harry has *already* done that, don't you ;-) ? What's your point? What Harry has or hasn't done has nothing to do with what one may expect Snape to do. And besides, given that Severus has shown no ability to control his own emotions where Harry is concerned, Harry's example only points to the dangers of Snape's neurotic hysteria. Lupinlore From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Sun Dec 19 08:34:40 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 08:34:40 -0000 Subject: You're in the A rmy, now. wasFalse Alarm? Was:Re: Adults "failing" Harry (in tP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120089 > Pippin: > I've never been in the military, and will gladly accept correction > from someone who has, but would any regular army in its right > mind want a chronic rebel like Sirius or an incorrigible thief like > Dung? Neri: Yes, definitely. Almost every army in the world has at least one unit that is comprised of rebels, potential (or actual) criminals and generally all kinds of misfits. This unit is regularly assigned the most dangerous operations and positions. The reason is that the nice guys are frequently too sane to risk themselves in suicide missions. > Pippin: > They'd have washed out in basic, seems to me. I've never > heard of a regular army where the soldiers get to decide which > orders are important. The first thing Sun Tzu did, when he > accepted the challenge of turning the Emperor's harem into an > army, was have the chief concubine killed for disobedience. > Neri: Discipline in these units is indeed a complex issue. During basic training discipline would be enforced very ruthlessly (Sun Tzu's method would be a bit extreme nowadays, but not by much) but once these soldiers had proven their merit the level of discipline would typically be lower than in the usual units. The wise commander will routinely let these troops get away with a lot, as long as they deliver the priceless goods: uncompromising courage under fire. In such units, the real breach of discipline would be considered failing to charge and failing to come to the help of your friends. In this sense Sirius was a model soldier: his first breach of discipline basically endangered only himself. His second was a classical "you don't lets your friends charge the enemy by themselves" and also a classical "no one's left behind". Also, in hindsight it was probably the correct decision: reading the description of the battle, it is pretty obvious that Sirius made the small difference that saved the other Order members, Harry and the prophecy until DD showed up. This is beside the point, however - Sirius would have gone anyway, and there were certainly many cases in military history in which a thoughtless dash to save your friends led to disaster ("Blackhawk Down" describes a typical example with reasonable realism). Despite this, most armies still consider this type of units a great asset. Mundungus' offence in leaving his watch is another thing. We know very little about Mundungus, and we don't know if DD punished him in any way, but Mrs. Figg seemed quite apprehensive. Generally, in such special units leaving the watch would be considered a serious offence not because it was a breach of discipline, but because it would be endangering your friends. If it was done out of thoughtlessness rather than lack of courage, and no lasting harm was done, the soldier would usually keep his place in the unit (although he might sustain some severe punishment that he'll typically take "like a man"). Of course, the Order is not a regular unit at all, but seems to be typical underground organization. These organizations are something else again, but they are similar to the above units in that courage and loyalty to your friends are more important than strict discipline. Underground organizations also typically include criminals, rebels and other misfits. The Order of the Phoenix indeed follows this pattern ? in addition to the rebel and the thief they also have a werewolf, a squib, an ex-DE and a severely paranoid ex-auror. It will probably be these misfits that will win the war, rather than the Arthurs and the Mollys. Neri From bob.oliver at cox.net Sun Dec 19 08:52:57 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 08:52:57 -0000 Subject: Is Snape really that good at Occlumency? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120090 At several points in OOTP, we were told that Snape is a master Occlumens. Yet, according to Snape Occlumency requires one to "clear your mind of all emotion." Now, this is something that Snape seems singularly unable to do, particularly when dealing with Harry. Yet, we are led to believe that, although he cannot clear his mind of emotion when dealing with a 15 year old student, he CAN do so when his life is on the line before the most evil and knowledgable wizard in the world. Interesting. What are the possibilities here? 1) Snape really isn't nearly as good an Occlumens as he and everyone else thinks. Which, of course, does not bode well. 2) Snape was lying. Occlumency really doesn't require you to clear your mind. But why would he lie? 3) Snape was mistaken. Occlumency does not require clearing your mind, but blocking it with emotion. After all, it is not a clear mind that saves Harry from Voldie, but his emotions. Many people have commented on this seeming inconsistency, and speculated that occlumency was a waste of time if, in fact, what Harry needs to do to battle Voldemort is fill himself with emotion, not block it. Thus, Snape is a good Occlumens but he really doesn't understand *why* he's a good Occlumens. But wouldn't his own teacher have corrected this belief? Or perhaps Snape is self-taught or a "natural" Occlumens. It's just that he has an unclear understanding of his own defenses. He can block Voldemort not because, as he thinks, he is clearing his mind, but because he's a perpetually seething cauldron of rage and bitterness. And, in that case, Dumbledore might not realize that Snape can't teach Occlumency because Snape doesn't understand it correctly himself. 4) Snape really is able to clear his mind in the presence of Voldemort but cannot in Harry's presence. Now this would seem to stretch credulity, but I have a feeling this is what JKR is telling us. Which means that Snape is even more childish and petty than he at first appears. Once again, this does not bode well. Lupinlore From heos at virgilio.it Sun Dec 19 01:05:39 2004 From: heos at virgilio.it (chrusotoxos) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 01:05:39 -0000 Subject: Did Snape know WHY he must teach Harry Occlumency? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120091 I hadn't thought about that issue before, but it's true that it is quite important. > Alla said: > I don't know your position on the following question - do you > believe that Snape is in many ways Dumbledore right hand in anti- > Voldemort's efforts? Yes, I believe this. > Because if you do, and that is kind of my stand on it, I don't think > we can doubt that Snape knows EVERYTHING about Prophecy. > If you don't think that Snape is Dumbledore's right hand, then sure, > it is quite possible to assume that he did not know about Prophecy. I'm not sure about this. I mean, he has to work among the DE, aren't we sure of this? And if LV finds out about the prophecy, then EVERYTHING is lost: he would know that he can't be killed and so on. He would come right at Hogwarts and kill Harry. And while Snape is "a superb Occlumens", the risk is far too great - he could be suspected, tortured, injured...I really think that only DD knows about the prophecy. > I also tend to share the speculation that Snape was the one who > originally overheard the Prophecy, but that is just speculation of > course. But there's also this splendid idea, which I really want to share. I'm actually thinking that Snape overheard it as a bad guy, and when he discovered that LV intended to kill the Potters, he was honour-bound to protect them (because James had saved his life). He went to DD and together they decided to misdirect the DE towards the Longbottoms, who as Aurors were best in Defence. But against all odds, LV "chose not the pureblood...", and his most faithful DE, who had known something about the Longbottoms being crucial, went for them, "when nobody was expecting that". That's why everybody feels so uneasy around Neville...and that's why Snape is angry at every good guy: he knows that in war, nobody can be totally good... > Now, about the questions you asked - well, yeah, I think that Snape > was outright lying when he told Harry that he was neither special > nor important. > Why would he do that? Ummm, because he is Snape. :o) Completely agree with this!! ;)) What do you think about this whole Prophecy-Longbottoms-Lestranges theory? Does it sound right, or completely stupid??? Chrusotoxos From patientx3 at aol.com Sun Dec 19 09:57:13 2004 From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 09:57:13 -0000 Subject: A child is, by definition, WRONG In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120092 chrusotoxos wrote: >>In my opinion, Harry has always acted the little hero, never trusting the adults surrounding him. Everybody said that the Philosopher's stone was well protected? Na, don't believe it! Let's go and rescue it! And the same goes for the Chamber [snip] In a way I admire him, he's so brave and all, but at the same time I'm like, Calm down, adults know what is good for you!<< HunterGreen: And what happened after these incidents? Did Dumbledore go to Harry at the end of SS/PS and chide him for going after the stone? Did he say that the stone was perfectly safe without intervention? No, he *rewarded* him. He *publically* rewarded him and Hermione and Ron with a heck of a lot of points to get them the House Cup. Neville, who was doing the smart thing and trying to stop them, got points as well, but not NEARLY as many as the trio. The same thing happens at the end of CoS, he's rewarded for not going to an adult, for risking his life and trying to save everything himself when he's surrounded by adults. Dumbledore is TEACHING him to do things on his own. If you want to think of Harry as being always wrong, that's fine, but the adults in his life aren't that smarter if they're encouraging this behavior (goodness, Snape is right!). chrusotoxos: >> If Harry had trusted Dumbledore, Lupin, Sirius, Molly Weasley, even Snape - if he had thought of Snape before breaking in in Umbridge's office, then Sirius would still be alive. He played the hero and it didn't work. Children can be cute, but they are not always right!!<< HunterGreen: I'm sort of confused by what you mean by trusting the other adults, trusting them by working harder at occulmency or by not believing the vision? I think both of those were just human nature. First he couldn't ignore his curiosity about wanting to get further down the tunnel and second it would be extremely difficult for anyone to just brush aside the dream he had about the DoM. Of course I don't think it was right or justified for him to rush off to the DoM (a hideously stupid idea), but who he should have trusted in that situation was *Hermione*, since she was the voice of common sense (it wasn't even the end of the workday for goodness sake!). Perhaps if one of the adults had actually talked to him and told him specifically to contact Snape if he had a vision he would have remembered Snape. As you are saying he IS a child, and children (especially teenagers) do not think well in a crisis. If one of the order members had thought of that and had a talk with Harry about what to do if he had a vision, he would have been FAR more likely to remember Snape in an emergency. I think DD and everyone else were just assuming that either Harry wouldn't have any more visions or that he would ignore them. Both stupid things to assume. Adults are stupid too. chrusotoxos: >> Therefore, what happened is not Dumbledore's fault (even if he said so himself)<< HunterGreen: It is his fault. If he had told Harry "Voldemort wants to lure you to the DoM to get something for him, that only you can get." Then Harry would have been much more likely to dismiss the vision as false. Dumbledore hastened Sirius' death by lying to Harry the whole year. Harry acted like a child, in part, because he was treated like one. He was left in the dark, without the proper information to see the whole picture, and that blocked him from seeing the obvious: that Voldemort was trying to get him to come to the DoM. chrusotoxos: >> and most definitely is not Snape's, who is already playing dirty on several fronts and cannot afford to be thrown off balance by a stupid kid who is not even trying to learn.<< HunterGreen: Snape is just a scapegoat. Harry knows he(Harry, not Snape) had a large hand in Sirius' death and is trying to avoid facing that. He already hates Snape and Snape hates him back, so he's an easy person to siphon off the guilt. I doubt it makes any difference to Snape either way. chrusotoxos: >> I really believe that in Book 6, Harry will grow up, and the greater signal would be trusting Snape<< HunterGreen: Well, remember, its Snape's fault Harry doesn't trust him. Or at least its his fault Harry doesn't like him. He's been rather horrible and mean to Harry from day one, but that is a subject for another post. -HunterGreen (Rebecca) From chrissilein at yahoo.com Sun Dec 19 10:31:55 2004 From: chrissilein at yahoo.com (LadyOfThePensieve) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 10:31:55 -0000 Subject: Is Snape really that good at Occlumency? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120093 Hello Lupinlore, when I read your statement I wondered how much more false a statement as yours can be? You oversee some crucial points. First at all! Harry took a look into the Pensieve (Snape?s Worst Memory). When he saw what happened to the 15 years old Snape it did not happen in the Occlumentic lesson, but after Snape left the room. When Harry shortly penetrated Snapes mind, Snape stopped the penetration after a very short while (Seen and Unforseen). So you see, you are putting things together which neither happened under the very same circumstances, nor do you make any detailed distinctions. I really love the HP books and do really wonder why people are so biased when they judge specific circumstances in the books. Your view makes me wonder how much stupid Dumbledore can be up to your eyes? Trying to take revenge on a fictional character is petty at all events from my point of view. You call yourself Lupinlore. If you want to learn something from him then to be much more detailed and much juster. Calm down a little bit. Greetings from Austria. From cmjohnstone at hotmail.com Sun Dec 19 11:57:47 2004 From: cmjohnstone at hotmail.com (littleleahstill) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 11:57:47 -0000 Subject: Occlumency the right answer? (was: Yet another defense ....) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120094 Snow: Don't you think it would be almost essential for Harry to learn the Occlumency lessons under adverse conditions? After all, Harry would have to learn to be in control of his emotions or overcome his hatred to use Occlumency properly against Voldemort. Leah: I read this, nodding in agreement, and then thought, 'Hang on a minute, what sort of emotions was Harry struggling to control when Voldemort finally broke through?' He's drifting off in the History of Magic exam, actually more or less emptying his mind of emotion while staring at Parvati's hair. That description of the long black hair, with the little lights in it, reminds me of a crystal ball, or, rather, an obsidian mirror, objects that are used to focus the mind away from day to day life and emotions, so that it can receive emanations from 'the far side'. Then Harry wishes he was a Leglimens, so that he could read Parvati's mind, and he begins a sort of mental wandering, this time looking at the blackness of his closed eyes...trolls, goblins, conferences,.... and there's Voldemort just coming in quietly through the open door. No uncontrolled emotions, no wallowing in memories, no provocation. It's not until this vision is well under way that Harry feels emotion and by then, it's too late. Let's look for a moment at Dumbledore's explanation of Occlumency which Snow quoted earlier: "It is true, however, that those who have mastered Legilemency are able, under certain conditions, to delve into the minds of their victims and to interpret their findings correctly. The Dark Lord, for instance, almost always knows when somebody is lying to him. Only those skilled at Occlumency are able to shut down those feelings and memories that contradict the lie " Dumbledore and Snape need to know Occlumency; Voldemort would be quite interested in delving into their minds. Voldemort doesn't care about delving into Harry's mind- he wants Harry in HIS mind. He doesn't seem to care what Harry might know about DD, about the Order, about Snape. All he wants is to show Harry things- he wants Harry to read his mind. DD thinks Occlumency is the answer because he fears Voldemort will use Harry as a spying device on the Order, but Harry is in fact a spying device on Voldemort. They, and we, know that Harry likes to sift through pensieves and that he can access Snape's memories even when they're still in his head. DD may have thought the Bertha Jorkins warning was enough, and Snape doesn't report otherwise. Harry didn't need to be taught to shut doors, to be an Occlumens. He needed to be taught how, when he delves into minds, 'to interpret his findings correctly'. He needs to be taught how to be a Leglimens. Leah From annemehr at yahoo.com Sun Dec 19 13:28:56 2004 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 13:28:56 -0000 Subject: Is Snape really that good at Occlumency? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120095 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "LadyOfThePensieve" wrote: > > Hello Lupinlore, > > when I read your statement I wondered how much more false a statement > as yours can be? You oversee some crucial points. First at all! Harry > took a look into the Pensieve (Snape?s Worst Memory). When he saw > what > happened to the 15 years old Snape it did not happen in the > Occlumentic lesson, but after Snape left the room. > When Harry shortly penetrated Snapes mind, Snape stopped the > penetration after a very short while (Seen and Unforseen). > So you see, you are putting things together which neither happened > under the very same circumstances, nor do you make any detailed > distinctions. > I really love the HP books and do really wonder why people are so > biased when they judge specific circumstances in the books. Your view > makes me wonder how much stupid Dumbledore can be up to your eyes? > Trying to take revenge on a fictional character is petty at all events > from my point of view. > You call yourself Lupinlore. If you want to learn something from him > then to be much more detailed and much juster. > > Calm down a little bit. Greetings from Austria. Annemehr: I do not understand your point. Lupinlore (msg. 120090) was exploring a seeming contradiction in the text: that, while telling Harry to clear his mind of emotions, Snape was showing plenty of emotion himself. I thought that post was a good one, and it had nothing to do with Harry's offense in looking into the pensieve, or the time when Harry used the Protego spell. Maybe if you'd quote Lupinlore and answer point by point I would understand you better. Annemehr From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Sun Dec 19 13:39:39 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 05:39:39 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dumbledore and Harry - Books 1-4 and Book 5 (Was: A child is, by definition, WRONG) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041219133939.31149.qmail@web53103.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120096 --- huntergreen_3 wrote: > And what happened after these incidents? Did Dumbledore go to Harry > at the end of SS/PS and chide him for going after the stone? Did he > say that the stone was perfectly safe without intervention? No, he > *rewarded* him. He *publically* rewarded him and Hermione and Ron > with a heck of a lot of points to get them the House Cup. Neville, > who was doing the smart thing and trying to stop them, got points > as > well, but not NEARLY as many as the trio. The same thing happens at > the end of CoS, he's rewarded for not going to an adult, for > risking > his life and trying to save everything himself when he's surrounded > by adults. Dumbledore is TEACHING him to do things on his own. If > you > want to think of Harry as being always wrong, that's fine, but the > adults in his life aren't that smarter if they're encouraging this > behavior (goodness, Snape is right!). > > > -HunterGreen (Rebecca) I quite agree. I found Dumbledore's book 5 speech to Harry to be almost incredible. "I tried to protect you"?!?!?!? Um, since when? For four books Harry was rewarded for going off on his own but at the end of Book 5 we're expected to believe that Dumbledore was trying to shelter him by not telling him anything. And calmly saying that what did it matter if many unknown people died as long as Harry was safe. Yes, I'm sure Harry needed to hear that, will make him feel so much better when he gets the time during the summer to reflect on Dumbledore's words. I would have found it more consistent with the encouragement of the previous books if Dumbledore had said that while he regretted Harry's personal pain and stress, that this was how things had to be done because there was a war on and that Harry would be a big part of it. The idea that Dumbledore could love Harry so much based on year-end summings-up of events and occasional meetings during the school year is not credible, to me. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Jazz up your holiday email with celebrity designs. Learn more. http://celebrity.mail.yahoo.com From Ali at zymurgy.org Sun Dec 19 14:47:33 2004 From: Ali at zymurgy.org (Ali) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 14:47:33 -0000 Subject: Accio CFP Deadline reminder Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120097 Accio 2005 would like to remind you that the deadline for submissions in response to our call for papers is fast approaching. If you have a presentation that you would like to submit for our consideration, please email it to submissions at accio.org.uk by December 31, 2004. Please see http://www.accio.org.uk./call4papers.shtml for detailed information. Anyone who is interested in participating in a Snape panel, please email the same address, submissions @ accio.org.uk (without the gaps) to indicate your interest. Accio 2005 is an unofficial friendly event, bringing together academics and adult Harry Potter fans to discuss all aspects of J. K. Rowling's Harry Potter books. Planned events include presentations, panels, speeches, games, a feast, and informal discussions into the wee hours. Sponsored by HPfGU, Accio 2005 is the first Harry Potter conference in the UK, and will take place at the University of Reading over the weekend of 29 - 31 July, 2005. For more information, please see our website at http://www.accio.org.uk./ From eloiseherisson at aol.com Sun Dec 19 15:44:28 2004 From: eloiseherisson at aol.com (eloise_herisson) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 15:44:28 -0000 Subject: Parenting Harry (was: Re: I don't like him much) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120098 > >Eloise wrote: > > Snip > > > Lupin is present at school with Harry for only one year out of five > > and at the end of it what does he do? *He gives him back the map*, > > the map which he was "astounded" Harry hadn't handed in. Just > > because he was no longer a teacher he felt no obligation to keep it > > from him,but by that act tacitly colluded with Harry's rule- > breaking > > and possibly putting himself into danger again in the future. > > McGonagall could fulfil the role, but for some reason seems less > > involved, strange since she's Harry's head of house. > > imamommy: > > Well, he was "astounded" because Harry knows Sirius Black is > (supposedly) hunting him. The next sentence references the attack on > Gryffindor tower after Neville lost the passwords. Eloise: Correct. Although I'm not sure that Lupin knows that Harry believes that Sirius had escaped in order to kill him at that point. imamommy: > After the danger has passed, Lupin doesn't feel badly because there > are no more mass murderers looking for Harry. Eloise: An attempt was made on Harry's life when he was a baby. An attempt was made on Harry's life when he was in his first year. An attempt was made on his life in his second year. Lupin has no grounds for thinking that Harry's life won't be in danger in future and more to the point, he is as I say above, colluding with Harry's rule breaking and quite possibly his looking for trouble. imamommy: I think he is also > overcome by nostalgia, and wants Harry to have this map that James > and his friends made, and used together. Eloise: There is no question in my mind that that is the case. However, the argument I was making was that Snape is the only one who *consistentely* disciplines Harry and ties to curb his rule breaking tendencies and that even Lupin, who cares deeply for Harry and does attempt to exercise some control over him, ultimately fails in this role. How does Lupin's giving the Map back to Harry out of nostalgia contradict that? ~Eloise From elsyee_h at yahoo.com Sun Dec 19 16:11:18 2004 From: elsyee_h at yahoo.com (Tammy) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 16:11:18 -0000 Subject: Is Snape really that good at Occlumency? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120099 >lupinlore wrote: > > At several points in OOTP, we were told that Snape is a master > Occlumens. Yet, according to Snape Occlumency requires one to "clear > your mind of all emotion." Now, this is something that Snape seems > singularly unable to do, particularly when dealing with Harry. Yet, > we are led to believe that, although he cannot clear his mind of > emotion when dealing with a 15 year old student, he CAN do so when > his life is on the line before the most evil and knowledgable wizard > in the world. > Tammy replies: I think Snape is exaggerating the truth a little bit for Harry's understanding of Occlumency. Harry obviously looks at the world in a very "black or white" way, and sees little shades of grey. Snape says "Only those skilled at Occlumency are able to shut down those feelings and memories that contradict the lie, and so utter falsehoods in his presence without detection." (pg 531, US paperback). To me, that would suggest that you only need to block out CERTAIN emotions. For Harry, that would - at this point - seem to signify that he needs to block all emotions. For Snape, if he is indeed spying (for either side I might add), he would only need to shut down certain emotions. The feelings he has against Harry, James, Remus, Sirius, etc would only be to his benefit in Voldemort's presence, thus Snape would have no need to even practice shutting those down. If he's spying for Voldemort, he would still have no need to shut those down, as Dumbledore knows and accepts Snape's anti-Potter feeligns. The feelings he would need to shut down are his soft spot for Dumbledore (if he's spying for Dumbledore) and the feelings and emotions tied with whatever Dumbledore is asking him to do. If he's spying for Voldemort, he would need to hide his anti-Dumbledore feelings or pro-Voldemort feelings. And as one recent topic pointed out, we do only see things from Harry's POV, thus Snape would have little need to control anything in Harry's presence. Snape could be entirely different when with Voldemort. And, IIRC, Snape has usually been calmer in Dumbledore's presence than when he is alone with Harry (POA not withstanding). -Tammy From spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com Sun Dec 19 16:45:53 2004 From: spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com (dungrollin) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 16:45:53 -0000 Subject: Yet another defense of Snape's Occlumency lessons (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120100 Right, I absolutely promise you all that this will be my last post on the subject ? unless someone manages to come up with a convincing counter to it, in which case I'll post briefly to say that I'm converted. Alla wrote in post 119990: I think I am going back again to speculation that something VITAL was missing in Snape's instructions. Dungrollin: The quote above is what originally provoked me. Because we can't know what Occlumency or Legilimency is like, we try to find parallels in the real world ? and frankly, there aren't any. Nobody knows what it is like to have one's mind attacked in this way. What we do know is that in the Potterverse it has parallels with resisting the Imperius curse, and that takes *willpower*, not relaxation, or meditation. On the very first attempt at resisting Snape's attack, Harry threw it off, because he was stubbornly refusing to let Snape see his memory of Cho under the mistletoe. Interestingly enough, nobody responded to the part of my post (120052) about there being no evidence at all that Harry had any difficulty in following what Snape meant when he said 'clear your mind'. Why postulate that Harry *can't* do it, when there's no evidence for it at all? There's plenty of evidence that he wasn't trying, and most seem to accept that he's partly to blame ? but there seems to be a need to blame Snape too, and to blame him more than Harry. What I'm arguing against is the supposition that Snape didn't give Harry enough information to learn Occlumency properly. SSSusan wrote in post 120083: WHERE in these two scenes does Snape help him out? Harry wants to know something vital ? he's asking questions for once!!! ? and Snape just yells at him for saying Voldemort's name and ignores the question. Then, when Harry admits he's having a hard time, Snape yells at him *savagely*. This is hardly going to engender in Harry a feeling that it's okay or good or wise to tell Snape he's struggling or to ask further questions. Dungrollin: Snape doesn't ignore that question ? he does answer it afterwards, after making it clear that saying Voldemort's name disturbs him profoundly. He snarls "You seem to have visited the snake's mind because that was where the Dark Lord was at that particular moment." Yes, he *snarls*. Well, he would, wouldn't he? He's Snape. But he *does* answer the question. This is an excellent example of what I'm arguing against. I'll explain: Snape's not nice, I'm not saying he is, and I'm not defending his snide comments and insults, nor his snarling, shouting, glaring, hissing or spitting throughout the Occlumency lessons. Everyone knows that he's a nasty piece of work, he can't change it, and he can't hide it. Harry knows full well what Snape's like - he wasn't *expecting* tea and sympathy in the lessons he was *expecting* Snape to be nasty. Suggesting that Snape's attitude was such a nasty shock to Harry that Harry lost the will to learn Occlumency just doesn't ring true to me - it never stopped Harry trying in potions lessons. While I think Snape's manner can be faulted almost every time he opens his mouth, I'm not sure that the same is true of (the majority of*) his actions, nor of what he's actually saying behind the snarls. He *has* to couch it in supercilious language, peppered with insults; he *has* to take every opportunity he can get to make Harry feel small, because he wouldn't be Snape otherwise. But he *does* explain why Harry should study Occlumency, he *does* (at least to Harry's apparent satisfaction if not to the satisfaction of the members of this list) explain what Harry has to practise at night, and he *does* answer a hell of a lot more questions than any other adult throughout OotP. There are only four instances that I can find of Snape *not* answering Harry's questions: 1. In 12GP, when Harry asks why he has to study Occlu-thing, and Snape evades the question with "Because the Headmaster thinks it a good idea." (But he *does* explain more in the first lesson). 2. Harry asks how they know that Voldy knows Harry was in his head during the snake vs Weasley incident, and Snape says "It is enough that we know." (This presumably hinges either on Snape's secret activities for the Order, or on what DD saw behind Harry's eyes just before he portkeyed to GP - and Snape *can't* tell Harry that). 3. "What's in the department of Mysteries?" Well ? obviously Snape's not going to answer that, is he? 4. "Why do you call Voldemort the Dark Lord? I've only ever heard Death Eaters call him that." ? Frankly I wouldn't answer that either, but they're interrupted by Trelawney in the entrance hall anyway, . Blaming Snape's *manner* (i.e. the hissing and spitting and snarling and insults) for why Harry didn't learn Occlumency, I can understand (if I don't completely agree). What I'm finding difficult to comprehend is the desperation to find instances where Snape *didn't teach Harry properly*. Seems to be a case of Ron-itis. Things didn't go well. Someone must be to blame. *Can't* be Hero Harry ? let's blame Snape... Dungrollin And my profound apologies for dragging this all up again ? must have bored some of you silly. * - I'm talking strictly about the Occlumency lessons, here; I'm not approving of his smashing Harry's potion sample, nor of him delaying Harry from telling DD about Crouch... etc. From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Sun Dec 19 17:06:15 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 09:06:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Parenting Harry (was: Re: I don't like him much) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041219170615.55598.qmail@web53104.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120101 --- eloise_herisson wrote: > However, the argument I was making was that Snape is the only one > who *consistentely* disciplines Harry and ties to curb his rule > breaking tendencies and that even Lupin, who cares deeply for Harry > and does attempt to exercise some control over him, ultimately > fails in this role. How does Lupin's giving the Map back to Harry > out of nostalgia contradict that? > > ~Eloise I agree with Eloise - great post, by the way. Lupin is one of those characters who's gone down in my estimation as the series has progressed. Not as far down as Molly, who I dislike quite strongly, but enough to make me think that Lupin's lack of involvement in Harry's life is probably a good thing for Harry. I don't think Snape gets nearly enough credit for his "demented mother hen" act for Harry. Yes he's snide and insulting when reminding Harry of Harry's youth and lack of experience and all the rest, and yes, he's a big old meany-head. But he's right about an awful lot of stuff and if you get past his cutting edge, there's a lot of sound common sense too. His raking down of Harry in POA over his going into Hogsmeade is actually quite accurate. There are a lot of people giving up their time and energy to keep Harry safe - I'm sure the teachers just love working a whole day, grading essays or tests in the evening and then taking night shifts to look out for Sirius Black. And there's never a hint that Harry ever thinks about this aspect of things, that these people are putting themselves out for him. All he does is pout about the unfairness of not going to Hogsmeade. Frankly if I was a teacher with no particular closeness to the Potter family, I might be more than a little ticked at Harry's refusal to co-operate until Black was found. Ditto Snape's comment during occlumency that Harry is not special. Yeah, Lupin would have been more supportive, but as usual Snape had a point: Harry's got to work at developing his talents and skills, he's not a natural or prodigy, and he'd better buckle down. Especially in view of Dumbledore's (apparent - I still have issues with it but for the sake of argument I'll accept it for now) determination to protect Harry from the truth and the implications of that truth, I have more sympathy for those actually charged with the practical tasks of teaching and disciplining Harry. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Dec 19 18:15:43 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 18:15:43 -0000 Subject: Is Snape really that good at Occlumency? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120102 Lupinlore wrote: At several points in OOTP, we were told that Snape is a master Occlumens. Yet, according to Snape Occlumency requires one to "clear your mind of all emotion." Now, this is something that Snape seems singularly unable to do, particularly when dealing with Harry. Yet, we are led to believe that, although he cannot clear his mind of emotion when dealing with a 15 year old student, he CAN do so when his life is on the line before the most evil and knowledgable wizard in the world. Interesting. Alla: Great post, Lupinlore. Yes, I also thought about it. Especially after Snape's "emotions speech". As I said yesterday - hypocritical much, Snape? We have Lupin's " but he is a superb Occlumenc" So, should we trust Lupin or not? I tend to believe we should, but of course, I am not positive. Lupinlore: What are the possibilities here? 1) Snape really isn't nearly as good an Occlumens as he and everyone else thinks. Which, of course, does not bode well. 2) Snape was lying. Occlumency really doesn't require you to clear your mind. But why would he lie? Alla: OK as to first two, I would answer no, he is good Occlumenc and no, he was not lying (unless he is ESE, of course and was deliberately sabotaging the lessons :o)) Lupinlore: 3) Snape was mistaken. Occlumency does not require clearing your mind, but blocking it with emotion. After all, it is not a clear mind that saves Harry from Voldie, but his emotions. Many people have commented on this seeming inconsistency, and speculated that occlumency was a waste of time if, in fact, what Harry needs to do to battle Voldemort is fill himself with emotion, not block it. Thus, Snape is a good Occlumens but he really doesn't understand *why* he's a good Occlumens. But wouldn't his own teacher have corrected this belief? Or perhaps Snape is self-taught or a "natural" Occlumens. It's just that he has an unclear understanding of his own defenses. He can block Voldemort not because, as he thinks, he is clearing his mind, but because he's a perpetually seething cauldron of rage and bitterness. And, in that case, Dumbledore might not realize that Snape can't teach Occlumency because Snape doesn't understand it correctly himself. 4) Snape really is able to clear his mind in the presence of Voldemort but cannot in Harry's presence. Now this would seem to stretch credulity, but I have a feeling this is what JKR is telling us. Which means that Snape is even more childish and petty than he at first appears. Once again, this does not bode well. Alla: Actually, I think both 3 and 4 are possible. Let's say Snape is a natural Occlumenc, right? Either Dumbledore or Voldemort have somehow discovered that ability of his and just used it to their advantage. So, Snape did not have any lessons at all and did not discover what student of Occlumency ahs to do first, since it comes to him naturally. I would agree with number 4, but change it a little bit. Snape may as well be able to clear his mind but he is absolutely uncapable of teaching Harry how to do so. So, in short, Snape MAY be a great occlumenc, but he is grossly inadequate as Occlumency teacher to Harry, IMO LadyOfThePensieve wrote: snip. I really love the HP books and do really wonder why people are so biased when they judge specific circumstances in the books. Your view makes me wonder how much stupid Dumbledore can be up to your eyes? Alla: LOLOL! Can you believe that I am wondering about the same thing sometimes? I suspect we are thinking about different circumstances in the books though. I am not Lupinlore but I am going to answer your question anyway. How stupid Dumbledore was in my eyes (I am assuming you meant OOP and Occlumency specifically) - VERY stupid. LadyOfThePensieve wrote: Trying to take revenge on a fictional character is petty at all events from my point of view. Alla: Poor, poor FICTIONAL characters. I feel so bad for them because us bad, evil posters continuously criticise them (eh... taking revenge on them) for one thing or another. I think we can hope those fictional characters will survive though. Since we are on the subject, could you please tell me are all characters should be exempt from criticising in your opinion, or only some of them (like Snape), because I also have some characters to nominate to get exemption from criticising. (That was a joke. Before anyone wants to smack me - NO, I am not suggesting that we should stop criticising ANY character in the books(yeah, even Harry :o)), quite the opposite in fact) Tammy wrote: I think Snape is exaggerating the truth a little bit for Harry's understanding of Occlumency. Harry obviously looks at the world in a very "black or white" way, and sees little shades of grey. Snape says "Only those skilled at Occlumency are able to shut down those feelings and memories that contradict the lie, and so utter falsehoods in his presence without detection." (pg 531, US paperback). To me, that would suggest that you only need to block out CERTAIN emotions. For Harry, that would - at this point - seem to signify that he needs to block all emotions. For Snape, if he is indeed spying (for either side I might add), he would only need to shut down certain emotions. The feelings he has against Harry, James, Remus, Sirius, etc would only be to his benefit in Voldemort's presence, thus Snape would have no need to even practice shutting those down. If he's spying for Voldemort, he would still have no need to shut those down, as Dumbledore knows and accepts Snape's anti-Potter feeligns. Alla: OK, suppose this is indeed true and only certain emotions need to be shut down in order to succesfuly block Legilimenc intrusion. But does not it mean that Snape was teaching Harry incorrectly from the beginning? Because his love for Sirius saved at him in the end, right? You are saying that Snape was exaggerating the truth for Harry, but to me it sounds like he was not telling him the truth, if you are correct. I think we should make a suggestion for JKR to write Occlumency guide (something similar to Fantastic Beasts and Quidditch through ages). It will answer A LOT of our questions. :o) From McGregorMax at ec.rr.com Sun Dec 19 18:21:15 2004 From: McGregorMax at ec.rr.com (mcmaxslb) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 18:21:15 -0000 Subject: Parenting Harry (was: Re: I don't like him much) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120103 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "eloise_herisson" wrote:...However, the argument I was making was that Snape is the only one who*consistentely* disciplines Harry and ties to curb his rule breaking...~Eloise Sorry but I think that you,all of you Snape lovers actuality, are confused about this. Snape's actions are not *consistently* discipline. They are the vicious bullying of a greasy haired asshole that takes out petty school boy grudges on a child, indeed children for Harry is not his only victim, who can't retaliate. From the moment they met Snivellus has though his attacks and bullying created such animosity between them that Snivellus has hurt,almost lost the cause that he is supposed to be fighting for! And it is 100% Snape's fault. Now Dumbledore is not blameless. His decision to keep Harry in the dark about every thing, his keeping Harry at arms length help erode Harry's trust in him and the fact that he assigned the vital task on teaching Harry occlumency to Snivllus in spite of his suspicions that proved true as he admitted at the end of OotP that Snape wouldn't do a proper job. But none of that in any mitigates the heinous of Snape's actions such as using occlumency to torture Harry and his position as a teacher to bully students. One of my biggest hopes is that Harry gets his pay back on Snape beating and/or hexing Snively in to a greasy pulp! And I think I now have a handle on all you Snape lovers, you were in all probably bullies just like Snape and you enjoy seeing Harry being bullied. Takes you back to your school days when you were hurting people doesn't it? From nrenka at yahoo.com Sun Dec 19 18:29:19 2004 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 18:29:19 -0000 Subject: Yet another defense of Snape's Occlumency lessons (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120104 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dungrollin" wrote: > Dungrollin: > > Because we can't know what Occlumency or Legilimency is like, we > try to find parallels in the real world ? and frankly, there > aren't any. Nobody knows what it is like to have one's mind > attacked in this way. What we do know is that in the Potterverse > it has parallels with resisting the Imperius curse, and that takes > *willpower*, not relaxation, or meditation. On the very first > attempt at resisting Snape's attack, Harry threw it off, because he > was stubbornly refusing to let Snape see his memory of Cho under > the mistletoe. Not to toot my own horn, but I posted some thoughts about parallelisms and mechanisms (yes, with real life parallels) back in some notes at 116339, 116353, 117539, and various and sundry places. The essence of the argument is that resistance takes relaxation--of this particular kind, which is decidedly NOT limpness and rolling over, but a state where everything is working together but is not tense. Tense muscles are weaker than relaxed ones (as you learn quickly when punching things), and tense minds have more trouble doing complex tasks (like the state you need to be in to play a complex piano fugue--you aren't thinking about each note; do that, and you trip and fall.) The full-power actualization of willpower takes this kind of relaxed state. It's actually much harder to *resist* when you are tight and nervous. It's also hard to learn how to functionally resist when you're getting whacked hard from the get- go. I am away from my books, but I always read Harry's resistance to the Imperius curse as a kind of successful 'centering' operation. He hears the inner voice of resistance, and reaches a state wherein he and that voice are unified in purpose--and he breaks the curse. Both that kind of resistance and Occlumency seem to involve a kind of getting together with yourself, getting everything in line so that nothing sticks out, being balanced and not distracted by strong emotions or things like that. Stubbornness and a desire for things not to be seen helps, but Harry would have had to really get himself together to do that consistently--and consistency is what he does not evince. (There's an argument folded in there about teaching methods for *roughly analogous* disciplines, but if we're playing the strict 'no parallelisms' game, you are free to ignore those. I don't recommend it as a general methodological principle, as it then proceeds to destroy most arguments made at any time.) Now if ya'll will excuse me, I'm going to get back to my case of the stomach flu. -Nora is perfectly willing to admit that these arguments could not apply, but they make some elegant sense with things that are pretty widly true, especially if you have experienced the strange mind/body relationships pursued in some martial arts From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Dec 19 18:31:16 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 18:31:16 -0000 Subject: Parenting Harry (was: Re: I don't like him much) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120105 Mcmaxslb wrote: snip. Snape's actions are not *consistently* discipline. They are the vicious bullying of a greasy haired asshole that takes out petty school boy grudges on a child, indeed children for Harry is not his only victim, who can't retaliate. From the moment they met Snivellus has though his attacks and bullying created such animosity between them that Snivellus has hurt,almost lost the cause that he is supposed to be fighting for! And it is 100% Snape's fault. Alla: For some reason I don't really care to call "Snape greasy-haired asshole" and for the name "Snivellus"", but otherwise I agree. I would not go as far as to say that Snape bullies all children though. Mcmaxslb wrote: And I think I now have a handle on all you Snape lovers, you were in all probably bullies just like Snape and you enjoy seeing Harry being bullied. Takes you back to your school days when you were hurting people doesn't it? Alla: Ummm, you do realise that personal attacks tend to hurt your argument, do you? I think that was absolutely uncalled for. But that is just me. From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sun Dec 19 19:03:10 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 19:03:10 -0000 Subject: Harry Potter for GROWN-UPS (was Parenting Harry (was: Re: I don't like him much) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120106 mcmaxslb wrote: " And I think I now have a handle on all you Snape lovers, you were in all probably bullies just like Snape and you enjoy seeing Harry being bullied. Takes you back to your school days when you were hurting people doesn't it?" Del replies : Insulting people who think differently, and seeing things in black-and-white are typical of kids and teenagers, not grown-ups... Del From McGregorMax at ec.rr.com Sun Dec 19 19:17:01 2004 From: McGregorMax at ec.rr.com (mcmaxslb) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 19:17:01 -0000 Subject: Harry Potter for GROWN-UPS (was Parenting Harry (was: Re: I don't like him much) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120107 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: > > mcmaxslb wrote: > " And I think I now have a handle on all you Snape lovers, you were in > all probably bullies just like Snape and you enjoy seeing Harry being > bullied. Takes you back to your school days when you were hurting > people doesn't it?" > > Del replies : > Insulting people who think differently, and seeing things in > black-and-white are typical of kids and teenagers, not grown-ups... > > Del That paragraph is really hitting home, isn't it? From McGregorMax at ec.rr.com Sun Dec 19 19:34:42 2004 From: McGregorMax at ec.rr.com (mcmaxslb) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 19:34:42 -0000 Subject: Parenting Harry (was: Re: I don't like him much) In-Reply-To: <20041219170615.55598.qmail@web53104.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120108 However, the argument I was making was that Snape is the only one who *consistentely* disciplines Harry and ties to curb his rule breaking tendencies and that even Lupin, who cares deeply for Harry and does attempt to exercise some control over him, ultimately fails in this role. How does Lupin's giving the Map back to Harry out of nostalgia contradict that? ~Eloise I agree with Eloise - great post, by the way. Magda I think I've figured out you Snape lovers. You can't stand the fact that Harry is the hero of the Harry Potter series and that a hero has to be proactive, that the hero has to do things not just stand in a corner while a nasty,big nose SOB kicks him around. Well after 5 novels the fact that Harry is the hero of the Harry Potter books is not going to change and if all of you just can't seem to deal with that then maybe you should simply stop reading the books. From eloiseherisson at aol.com Sun Dec 19 19:35:43 2004 From: eloiseherisson at aol.com (eloise_herisson) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 19:35:43 -0000 Subject: Parenting Harry (was: Re: I don't like him much) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120109 > Mcmaxslb wrote: > snip. > > Snape's actions are not *consistently* > discipline. They are the vicious bullying of a greasy haired asshole Do take the trouble to disagree with what is actually said. I did not say that all Snape's actions are purely disciplinary (for goodness sake, I even said that as well as trying to save Harry, he had his own agenda for going after Sirius) because I don't see him as a one dimensional character. > that takes out petty school boy grudges on a child, indeed children > for Harry is not his only victim, who can't retaliate. From the > moment they met Snivellus has though his attacks and bullying > created such animosity between them that Snivellus has hurt,almost > lost the cause that he is supposed to be fighting for! And it is > 100% Snape's fault. If you've read any of my analyses of Snape's character in the past, which I don't expect you to have, given the volume of posts on this site, you will know that I consider Snape a deeply flawed character. I have never claimed that he is nice, or fair, or that he doesn't bully. That has nothing whatsoever to do with any particular role he may have (within the books) appropriated for himself or that JKR may have given him as part of her plot. At the moment I feel a little as though I am beating my head against a brick wall. This thread, from my POV has nothing to do with defending Snape's character, but merely with the observation that (as JKR has written the books) without Snape, there would be no-one effectively challenging Harry's tendency to rule break, no involved adult questioning his "special status". At the risk of repeating myself, Harry has no one parent figure. The various roles which a parent undertakes are split between various adults. Most of the limit setting seems to fall to Snape. Now I have not said that I approve of his methods, in fact I have not commented on them at all, because that actually is another issue. But I have, in this thread, given you good reason to think that I might not: >He either genuinely >....................... >It's usually down to Snape to do the less palatable side of >parenting, which is a little unfortunate, given his antipathy to his >charge. >aside from any character defects Snape may possess >Snape, in his own, unsympathetic way detests Harry or else gives a very convincing act of doing so >like him or not, >whether his methods are acceptable or not, whatever the motivation.... ............................................... Now you may read that as approbation, it was written neutrally because the appropriateness of *how* Snape carries out his duties was not my concern in this particular thread. In fact, my personal feelings about the character have no bearing on what I've said whatsoever. > Mcmaxslb wrote: > > And I think I now have a handle on all you Snape lovers, you were > in all probably bullies just like Snape and you enjoy seeing Harry > being bullied. Takes you back to your school days when you were > hurting people doesn't it? Eloise: Hmm. I'm not sure that you can jump from reading someone's analysis of the literary purpose of a character to making assumptions about their own personality. As a matter of fact, if it's any of your business, I was myself the victim of bullies at school and I now have to watch and help my own children as they cope with unfair teachers and the tribulations of the playground. I don't like bullying. I don't like the way Snape behaves towards Harry and his friends. But I am interested in what motivates people's behaviour, what makes them tick. I find very few people are one-dimensional and I don't believe that JKR wrote Snape as a one-dimensional character. From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sun Dec 19 19:40:26 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 19:40:26 -0000 Subject: You're in the Army, now. wasFalse Alarm? Was:Re: Adults "failing" Harry (in tP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120110 Neri wrote : " How did Sirius know that he must save not merely Harry but also the "proph ? "? The logical explanation is that he had known for some time that Voldy was after a prophecy." Del replies : A very interesting and enlightening post, thanks Neri! About that question above : it does seem clear after reading your post that Sirius knew about the Prophecy by the time of the DoM battle. However : 1. He could have been told about it very recently. Maybe someone else in the Order knew about it, and when the Order was contacted and told about Harry being gone and missing, maybe that someone explained what was in the DoM. 2. Sirius might have known for a very long time. If the Potters knew, then James might have told his very best friend. But DD might have asked him not to tell anyone else. Neri wrote : " Did the Order members also knew what the prophecy says? I couldn't find any certain canon for that, but my guess is that DD told them the first half of the prophecy. There was no reason to keep it a secret from them since Voldemort already knew it. OTOH there was a very good reason to tell them, since they may guard Harry better if they know the whole WW depends on keeping him alive." Del replies : That makes a lot of sense. But unfortunately that's not certain. DD might still have decided to keep the whole thing secret for whatever twisted reason. I just wish we knew *for sure*! If I've learned one thing about the HP books, it's not to assume what is not clearly written, so I'm feeling a bit uncomfortable assuming that all the Order members knew about the Prophecy and yet none of them told Harry anything about it. Neri wrote: "Also, when Harry tells Sirius and Lupin that Snape had stopped the Occlumency lessons they are horrified, and Lupin says sternly "Harry, there is nothing so important as you learning Occlumency! Do you understand me? Nothing!" For Harry, Lupin comes across here as the typical overprotective, slightly hysterical grownup. But knowing Lupin as the master of understatement, for him to say anything so forcefully he must mean it quite literally: "the most important thing for the war and the future of the whole WW is for Harry to learn Occlumency". At least to me this sounds as more than just worrying about Harry's personal safety." Del replies : Once again, this makes a lot of sense. But the problem is : we haven't been told what reason DD gave to the Order for implementing the Occlumency lessons. It might have been a very compelling reason that had nothing to do with the Prophecy, like presenting the dangers a possessed!Harry could represent for the Order as a whole, or even simply the fix the Order could be in if LV accessed Harry's memories of 12GP and the Order. Del From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sun Dec 19 19:43:31 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 19:43:31 -0000 Subject: Can Occlumency be taught ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120111 Alla wrote: "This way of teaching smells TO ME of Voldemort's way of teaching and I hope that occlumency can be taught." Del replies : Well, we still don't know WHO taught Occlumency to Snape, if anyone did. It might very well have been LV. And if Occlumency can be taught, my problem becomes : why isn't it taught to everyone? Or at least to everyone in the Order? But then, maybe it is? Del From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sun Dec 19 19:51:57 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 19:51:57 -0000 Subject: Did Snape know WHY he must teach Harry Occlumency? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120112 Alla wrote: "I don't know your position on the following question - do you believe that Snape is in many ways Dumbledore right hand in anti- Voldemort's efforts?" Del replies: In many ways, yes. Alla wrote: "Because if you do, and that is kind of my stand on it, I don't think we can doubt that Snape knows EVERYTHING about Prophecy." Del replies : I disagree. 1. We know that DD didn't tell everything to Snape, even things that concerned his job directly, like the fact that Harry was dreaming of the corridor. 2. I think DD acts with his subordinates in the very same way he acts with Harry : on a need-to-know basis. Strictly speaking, the Order members don't need to know about the Prophecy, so DD might not have told them. 3. I'm sure Peter's treason during VWI and his (DD's) own mistake in thinking that Sirius was the traitor for 12 years are still fresh in DD's memory. He knows very well that all his Legilimency can't completely prevent people from fooling him, so I wouldn't be surprised if he didn't want to take any unnecessary risks. For all his repeated affirmations that he trusts Snape, DD might still put limits on that trust. Del From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Dec 19 20:04:55 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 20:04:55 -0000 Subject: Parenting Harry (was: Re: I don't like him much) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120113 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "eloise_herisson" If you've read any of my analyses of Snape's character in the past, which I don't expect you to have, given the volume of posts on this site, you will know that I consider Snape a deeply flawed character. I have never claimed that he is nice, or fair, or that he doesn't bully. That has nothing whatsoever to do with any particular role he may have (within the books) appropriated for himself or that JKR may have given him as part of her plot. Alla: I read your analysis in the different thread, Eloise (I know that you refer these words to another poster) and I actually quite agree with your analysis. (I make different judgment about the character based on that analysis, but my vision of the character is actually quite close to yours) Eloise: At the risk of repeating myself, Harry has no one parent figure. The various roles which a parent undertakes are split between various adults. Most of the limit setting seems to fall to Snape. Now I have not said that I approve of his methods, in fact I have not commented on them at all, because that actually is another issue. But I have, in this thread, given you good reason to think that I might > not: > > >He either genuinely > >....................... > >It's usually down to Snape to do the less palatable side of > >parenting, which is a little unfortunate, given his antipathy to his > >charge. > > >aside from any character defects Snape may possess > > >Snape, in his own, unsympathetic way > > detests Harry or else gives a very convincing act of doing so > > >like him or not, > >whether his methods are acceptable or not, whatever the > motivation.... > ............................................... > > Now you may read that as approbation, it was written neutrally > because the appropriateness of *how* Snape carries out his duties was not my concern in this particular thread. In fact, my personal feelings about the character have no bearing on what I've said whatsoever. Alla: Again, I understand what you are saying, but I disagree. I think Snape's methods are quite closely connected to whether Snape can be considered to be a parent to the child or not. Parent can punish the child, TRUE, if child DESERVES the punishment. Do I need to count how many times Snape went off on Harry UNDESERVINGLY? I don't think that Snape DESERVES to be called a parent in any shape or way. That is what I am trying to say. He is not strict disciplinarian, like McGonagall, not in my opinhion, he is sadist and if you are saying that in the fractured parenting Harry receives he needs THAT, then allow me to register my strongest disagreement. From kcawte at ntlworld.com Sun Dec 19 20:27:13 2004 From: kcawte at ntlworld.com (Kathryn Cawte) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 20:27:13 -0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Harry Potter for GROWN-UPS (was Parenting Harry (was: Re: I don't like him much) References: Message-ID: <005001c4e609$21ace690$69206bd5@kathryn> No: HPFGUIDX 120114 > > mcmaxslb wrote: > " And I think I now have a handle on all you Snape lovers, you were in > all probably bullies just like Snape and you enjoy seeing Harry being > bullied. Takes you back to your school days when you were hurting > people doesn't it?" > > K I was under the impression the maturity level on this list was rather higher than this. I guess I've not been reading it enough recently. While the debates about Snape have always been highly emotional (you've gotta give JKR points for that, love him or hate him I've rarely met someone who's ambivalent about our Sev) this is a particularly petty viewpoint. Normally I wouldn't suggest that a viewpoint that differs from mine is less valid, but I can't think of any other way of describing this 'if you don't agree with me you're obviously wrong and a really nasty person' type of argument. It seems to be the kind of argument you only get from someone who realises they can't 'win' on the facts - which is silly because the arguments for either case can be made very convincingly as posters have often shown in past Snape debates. Personally I was a bullying victim for most of my schooldays, but that doesn't mean I always sympathise with Harry just because he's a victim some of the time. Is Snape nasty to Harry? Yes, without a doubt he is, but I don't think he's as bad as some people make out. (Actually I've seen a division between Brits and other nationalities, especially Americans, on this issue - maybe we Brits just have more snarky, mean teachers than other countries? ) It disappoints me that Snape is so darn immature around the surviving MWPP and Harry, but personally I think it's a sign of how badly affected he was by the incidents we've seen between him and MWPP during his schooldays. Emotionally he seems stuck in that teenage angst mindset, whenever he has to deal with the grown up versions, or in Harry's case nasty reminders of, his schoolday nemeses. And no this isn't an excuse for him - the way he behaves around Harry is wrong (although frankly I'd take someone who is outwardly mean and yet does his best to keep me in one piece than the reverse any day of the week), but I can see where he's coming from. I certainly can't speak for all the Snape lovers on the list but for me it's his flaws that make him interesting. And I'd also like to say that I wholeheartedly agree with whoever it was that made the point about Snape being the only one who is consistent in regards to Harry (Eloise was it?). Dumbledore especially seems to alternate between treating him like a child that can't be trusted (keeping information which imo Harry not only needed to know but had a *right* to know secret in both OOP and PoA) and actively encouraging him to go off into danger alone (PS and CoS). I suspect that for a lot of the people who deal with Harry regularly the fact that he was kept away from the WW for most of his life, rather than helping Harry has hindered him. They have grown so used to seeing him as their hope against Voldemort, as a weapon of some kind, that they don't see him as a child, who shows flashes of maturity but is still a minor who should be *protected* from danger, not sent headlong into it. K From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sun Dec 19 20:28:19 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 20:28:19 -0000 Subject: A child is, by definition, WRONG In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120115 imamommy wrote: "All of these examples were *before* Harry's Hogwarts letter came. It sounds like they were rather common, especially if we include this quote: "Sometimes, when he strained his memory during long hours in his cupboard, he came up with a strange vision..." (SS, p29, Scholastic) Sounds to me like he spent a lot of time in that cupboard. One could argue that these were "extreme situations," but I think punishing somebody for something they can't control is pathetic, like a parent shaming a child for not going potty in the right place. Generally, I think the Dursleys are (at the least)very ignorant parents." Del replies: All the examples you gave were instances of Harry doing MAGIC, the one thing the Dursleys cannot stand, the thing they had vowed to eliminate from his system. It seems logical to me that they would over-react in those cases, which were the most extreme situations Harry could ever get himself into. I'm not arguing that the Dursleys were good foster parents for Harry, because they weren't. I totally agree with you that they are at least very ignorant parents : this is obvious in the appalling way they raised not only Harry, but also Dudley. They had different goals in mind concerning the two boys, but they went completely wrong and over-board with both of them. Imamommy wrote : "I disagree that a child is wrong by definition. A child is entitled to make age-appropriate choices. They may not be the same choices an adult would make, but that doesn't make them wrong." Del replies: An honest decision can still be a wrong decision. Stealing is wrong, and yet many toddlers think it's right. Looking down on people different from you is wrong and yet many children think it's right. Considering anyone who doesn't think like you an idiot is wrong and yet many teenagers think it's right. They are all honest, and yet they are wrong. Imamommy wrote : "I never remember, even when I was, thinking, "I am a small child. I'd better do what Mommy tells me to, because she's so much older and wiser."" Del replies: I didn't put it into such words, but as a child I did have a very distinct feeling that some adults around me knew better very often. When I started to realise that they didn't always actually know better, it was quite a shock. Imamommy wrote: "I only remember feeling like I was grown-up, within my own world. Even more so when I was a teenager." Del replies: I too had my time as a young teenager when I thought I knew better than everyone else. But I soon realised how wrong I was. Imamommy wrote: " The trick is to place choices before a child, tell him what you would choose and what consequences there may be, and then let him make his decision and live with the consequences. This is scary as a parent, especially with teenagers, but forcing them to do something only ensures that they will run the other way." Del replies : I agree, but NOBODY is doing that kind of parenting on Harry. That's no wonder his relationships with the adults are so messed up. Del From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Dec 19 20:27:27 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 20:27:27 -0000 Subject: Can Occlumency be taught ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120116 Alla wrote previously: "This way of teaching smells TO ME of Voldemort's way of teaching and I hope that occlumency can be taught." Del replies : Well, we still don't know WHO taught Occlumency to Snape, if anyone did. It might very well have been LV. And if Occlumency can be taught, my problem becomes : why isn't it taught to everyone? Or at least to everyone in the Order? But then, maybe it is? Alla: Absolutely, it might have been Voldemort or Dumbledore OR as I said in another post it could be that nobody taught it to Snape, he just had such ability and that is why he has very little clue how to teach it to somebody else. As to why it is not taught to everyone? How about that the majority of the wizarding population does not need it, because Legilimenses are quite rare so no need to defend against them ont her egular basis? Just a guess. From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sun Dec 19 20:42:50 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 20:42:50 -0000 Subject: Yet another defense of Snape's Occlumency lessons (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120117 SSSusan wrote: " While Snape doesn't deliberately try to make Harry fail, he doesn't ask himself whether his methods are working with this all-important student either. If it's REALLY that important that Harry succeed, whether it's Potions or Occlumency, because Harry is the Big Weapon in VW2, and if Snape is a White Hat or at least a man who wants Voldy taken down, then WHY can he not "retrain" himself to actually assess his teaching methods with this one bratty kid and determine if they're working? And as they're *not* working well, perhaps he should figure out what else he might do? " Del replies : There are quite a few assumptions I'm not too sure about in this paragraph : 1. We still don't know for sure that Snape knows about the Prophecy. He might very well not know that Harry is the Big Weapon. 2. We don't know that Snape's teaching methods are not working on Harry. Harry has never failed Potions, and he apparently didn't do bad at all on his OWL. As for Occlumency, Harry managed to fight Snape back on the very first attempt if I remember well, which would indicate that Snape's chosen method was indeed adequate. 3. We don't know whether Snape looked for an alternate way of teaching Occlumency or not. Maybe he did. SSSusan wrote: " There are some things people can learn by jumping right into them. But where there's an option, this ex-teacher thinks it's wisest to opt for a slow start w/ some measure of success before moving into the difficult, real-life situation. Kind of like Lupin's boggart!dementor simulation before Harry had to encounter the real thing. It helps to understand the process, figure out what works, get a little confidence built up, then up the ante to what it might be like w/ Voldy." Del replies : Question : how do you know there might be an to Snape's method of teaching Occlumency? Comment: fighting Snape WAS a simulation. Harry was warned, he could prepare himself for it, and Snape was going to lift up the spell whether Harry managed to shake it off or not. Moreover, as I already said, this method DID work : Harry DID manage to shake the Legilimency spell off. Del From gbannister10 at aol.com Sun Dec 19 20:50:11 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 20:50:11 -0000 Subject: Harry Potter for GROWN-UPS (was Parenting Harry (was: Re: I don't like him much) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120118 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mcmaxslb" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" > wrote: mcmaxslb: > > " And I think I now have a handle on all you Snape lovers, you were > in > > all probably bullies just like Snape and you enjoy seeing Harry > being > > bullied. Takes you back to your school days when you were hurting > > people doesn't it?" Del: > > Insulting people who think differently, and seeing things in > > black-and-white are typical of kids and teenagers, not grown- ups... mcmaxslb: > That paragraph is really hitting home, isn't it? Geoff: I have no axe to grind on this matter. I have commented very occasionally in the past that I have never particularly liked Snape and for that reason, I tend to ignore threads involving deep analysis of our "friend". However, in belonging to this group for some considerable time [since message 73361 to be exact:-)], I have found that, in general, most posters are reasonably polite in their disagreements; there is the odd outburst but we tolerate the fact that we all have our own take on the books but it is JKR who dictates how far we shall be proved right or wrong. When I was at school, it was suggested to us that the person who resorts to personal insults was the person losing the argument. I hope that mcmaxslb's comments were an uncharacteristic and momentary lapse of netiquette. From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sun Dec 19 20:50:52 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 20:50:52 -0000 Subject: Adults "failing" Harry (was: Themes in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120119 Lupinlore wrote: "But the fact is, Dumbledore has let a lot of very delicate balls drop to the ground during his juggling act. Now, one can argue that it's unfair to expect him to deal with all of these delicate and complex issues. But he has taken the responsibility on himself by the decisions he has made, and therefore the onus of failure belongs to him." Del replies: I disagree. DD did not *choose* to take on those responsibilities. If anyone let the balls drop, it was James and Sirius, when they came up with the alternate Secret-Keeper plan *without consulting or even informing DD*. Then James and Lily got killed, and Sirius (Harry's *only* legal alternate guardian) got sent to Azkaban. DD had to deal quickly with the messy aftermath of a situation he was in no way responsible for. Moreover, DD cannot trust anybody, because the events of Godric's Hollow showed clearly that he can be fooled and anybody can be a traitor. Del From nrenka at yahoo.com Sun Dec 19 20:51:46 2004 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 20:51:46 -0000 Subject: Yet another defense of Snape's Occlumency lessons (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120120 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" > Del: > > 2. We don't know that Snape's teaching methods are not working on > Harry. Harry has never failed Potions, and he apparently didn't do > bad at all on his OWL. As for Occlumency, Harry managed to fight > Snape back on the very first attempt if I remember well, which would > indicate that Snape's chosen method was indeed adequate. On the first, it's interesting to note his realization of how much easier and pleasant things are when Snape is not there, which points towards the idea that Harry has learned something, but could probably- possibly have learned MORE... One the second, I tend to, in my analysis, see that as a little more of a fluke, given the later problems. Even when I was an absolute beginner, I managed to drop a senior student nice and hard once. Of course, the next time...heheh. The hallmark of learning in a discipline like that seems to be consistency, and that is what Harry never learned--in part, I think, because Snape's teaching was not producing good foundations (the ability to clear one's mind, for instance) for the actual practice of the skill itself. -Nora cheerfully drags in her RL experience, but finds it to address some issues nicely as a paradigm From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sun Dec 19 20:53:20 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 20:53:20 -0000 Subject: A child is, by definition, WRONG In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120121 Geoff wrote: " The whole affair is event-driven. Harry and Ron wanted initially to tell Professor McGonagall; events dictated against that." Del replies: How so? McGonagall was just feet away from them when they were in that cupboard. And not only her, but the whole Hogwarts staff. The only thing that prevented them from stepping outside that cupboard was themselves. Del From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Dec 19 21:02:29 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 21:02:29 -0000 Subject: Adults "failing" Harry (was: Themes in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120122 > Lupinlore wrote: 'But the fact is, Dumbledore has let a lot of very delicate balls drop to the ground during his juggling act. Now, one can argue that it's unfair to expect him to deal with all of these delicate and complex issues. But he has taken the responsibility on himself by the decisions he has made, and therefore the onus of failure belongs to him." > Del replies: I disagree. DD did not *choose* to take on those responsibilities. If anyone let the balls drop, it was James and Sirius, when they came up with the alternate Secret-Keeper plan *without consulting or even informing DD*. Then James and Lily got killed, and Sirius (Harry's *only* legal alternate guardian) got sent to Azkaban. DD had to deal quickly with the messy aftermath of a situation he was in no way responsible for. Moreover, DD cannot trust anybody, because the events of Godric's Hollow showed clearly that he can be fooled and anybody can be a traitor. Alla: I think that Lupinlore meant was Dumblecore CHOOSING to be a leader in anti-Voldemort resistance in general, not just dealing with one particular situation. Do you think anybody FORCED him to be a Leader of OOP? We definitely know that he CHOSE to be a Headmaster, since he refused at some point to become Minister of Magic. I am completely with Lupinlore on this one. Sorry! From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sun Dec 19 21:07:16 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 21:07:16 -0000 Subject: Yet another defense of Snape's Occlumency lessons (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120123 I, Del, wrote earlier: " 1. How EVER was Snape supposed to know that Harry's scar would hurt more after the Occlumency lessons??? Nobody has ever dealt with such a scar, and Harry didn't tell Snape what he was feeling. Maybe if he'd told him, Snape would have been worried." Lupinlore answered: " And yet Dumbledore seems to know a lot about it, and to have expected certain things. Now, he may just be guessing, but his knowledge would seem to indicate that such things are not at all unknown in the Wizarding World. If so Snape, as a "superb Occlumens," should be aware of such precedents and warn Harry about them." Del replies: I personally think that DD's knowledge comes from two very specific sources: - Harry himself, through Legilimency and through DD's mysterious ability to know many things that happen in the castle - Hermione But Snape has no access to either of these sources. Well, he is a Legilimens, but he doesn't seem to be as good as DD, and he most probably wasn't looking for that piece of information anyway. Lupinlore wrote: "In this case Snape CERTAINLY should have forseen such a development and warned Harry." Del replies: I agree. But somehow I don't picture Snape doing that kind of thing. Lupin would have, who gave Harry chocolate any time he fainted. But Snape wouldn't care. Lupinlore wrote: "What's your point? What Harry has or hasn't done has nothing to do with what one may expect Snape to do." Del replies: Oh I agree :-) I was just amused by the coincidence. Lupinlore wrote: " And besides, given that Severus has shown no ability to control his own emotions where Harry is concerned, Harry's example only points to the dangers of Snape's neurotic hysteria." Del replies: I agree. And once again I must regret the totally inappropriate and irresponsible attitude the WW in general and DD in particular seem to have concerning mental and emotional health. Expecting Snape to get over such deeply-rooted emotional problems on his own is totally unreasonable IMO. Snape showed from Day 1 that he is unable to deal sanely with Harry : someone should have done something about that situation a long time ago, instead of expecting him to just snap out of it, and worse, forcing the two of them to work together. Del From gbannister10 at aol.com Sun Dec 19 21:09:30 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 21:09:30 -0000 Subject: A child is, by definition, WRONG In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120124 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: > > Geoff wrote: > " The whole affair is event-driven. Harry and Ron wanted initially to > tell Professor McGonagall; events dictated against that." Del: > How so? McGonagall was just feet away from them when they were in that > cupboard. And not only her, but the whole Hogwarts staff. The only > thing that prevented them from stepping outside that cupboard was > themselves. Geoff: May I just re-quote part of my message 120065: Notice that they are about to go to Professor McGonagall (and not haring off on their own) when the announcement for all students to return to their dormitories is given; they hide in the staff room cloakroom to overhear the news that Ginny has been taken into the Chamber. Gilderoy Lockhart appears late and the staff remind him that he has claimed to know where the Chamber entrance is. So.. 'Lockhart gazed round at his stony-faced colleagues. "I.. I really never... You may have misunderstood.." "We'll leave it to you, then, Gilderoy," said Professor McGonagall. "Tonight will be an excellent time to do it. We'll make sure everyone's out of your way..." So he leaves saying that he will be in his office, getting ready... "Right," said Professor McGonagall, whose nostrils were flared, "That's got him out from under our feet. The Heads of Houses should go and inform their students what has happened. Tell them the Hogwarts Express will take them home first thing tomorrow.." (ibid. p.218) [This was COS "The Chamber of Secrets" UK edition] So the person to deal with is Lockhart. The others are involved in the preparations for closing the school. Their take is that Lockhart is going to deal with the matter. I enlarged on this a tad in message 120085.... "He and Ron know that Lockhart is going to deal with the matter, although I suspect they may have misgivings knowing his track record for getting it wrong. So they are leaving matters in his hands..." They might also have been a bit apprehensive about appearing out of the cloakroom like jack-in-the-boxes; outside of this, they felt there was nothing much they could do. Message 120085 again.... '..Harry could see the sun sinking, blood red below the skyline. This was the worst he had ever felt. If only there was something they could do. Anything....' It was up to the "Gilded King". And it was his craven refusal to do anything - other than run out to avoid the risk - that triggered the whole incident. From ibotsjfvxfst at yahoo.co.uk Sun Dec 19 21:13:14 2004 From: ibotsjfvxfst at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?Hans=20Andr=E9a?=) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 21:13:14 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Books 6 & 7 - Post 106899 revised Message-ID: <20041219211314.91105.qmail@web25107.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120125 Dear Friends, I have been posting occasionally to this group since April 2003 (post 55793). I rarely get many responses, and of those many are negative. However I do occasionally get very appreciative reactions sent to me privately, which I find very encouraging. Recently I sent 119524 containing my predictions for books 6 & 7 and as far as I know no one responded on the board, but I did receive a very encouraging email from cerebella316. Unfortunately my reply to her has not arrived as her email address has been disabled. I would therefore like to send my reply to the group, as I think others could be interested in her comments and my responses to them. I find her reaction and that of a few others so encouraging that I have decided to start sending a series of posts dealing with all the main characters of Harry Potter. This is a series being posted to another Yahoo group, Harry Potter for Seekers. I want to warn you that these posts are quite controversial, and people who suffer anguish from reading spiritual ideas that are different from their own should delete all posts with my name at the top before reading the contents. For those new to the group: my theory is that Harry Potter is a symbolical road map to complete human liberation through alchemical transformation. This week I will post the introduction to the series and then I will start with the discussion on Lily. If I am doing anything contrary to the rules of the group, please moderators let me know and I'll go sit in the corner and eat humble pie. Now here's my response to cerebella's email: I want to thank you profoundly for your very encouraging email. As you may have noticed I seldom get reactions and to get such an enthusiastic response makes it all worthwhile. I guess even if only one person really likes my posts it's be worth all the effort. > HansI would just like to begin by saying that I always get so > excited to see that you have posted. Whether or not my head believes > your theories are what JKR has in mind, my heart loves them (so does > this make me one of the people "living in inner conflict"?) I think > most of your theories are just beautiful. I especially love the idea > of Harry taking over as Keeper of the Keys of Hogwarts. Are you aware that I formed a group where I post very frequently? http://groups.yahoo.com/group/harrypotterforseekers. You're welcome to join or just read the posts, which are public. > Bella: > > I remember many posts in the summer talking about the two-way > mirrors helping Harry find Sirius if Harry chooses to go through the > veil. But we're not sure Sirius had his mirror when he fell > through, right? So what if the Trio find Sirius's mirror and fix > Harry's, and > then Harry takes a mirror with him through the veil and uses it to > contact this side of the veil to help him return from the other > side? What I mean is...I feel that if Harry were to pass through the > veil to the other side to find his parents and Sirius, etc., it may > be hard for him to leave. But, by looking into his mirror and seeing > Hermione and Ron on the other side, Harry has the strength to return > to them. It's a tough decision for him because he has ones he loves > on both sides. But, when it comes down to it, Ron and Hermione are > more *family* to him than anyone else--his surrogate family, but > those he loves the most nonetheless. (His time with his parents and > Sirius were so short in comparison.) Yes that would be a painful decision to have to make. Glass and mirrors seem to be important in Harry Potter, but I don't know exactly what they symbolise. But I keep making more discoveries, so who knows? > Bella: > > I know you and others have reasoned that the beheading of Ron (and > quite possibly Hermione) may just be a symbolic beheading. With this > in mind, I thought of the clich "lose his/her head" when > someone > loses his or her *mind*. Maybe something will happen to Ron (and > possibly Hermione) to make him go crazy, and Harry has to do > something to restore/save/resurrect him. (Maybe this has already > begun with the whole brain incidence at the end of OoP and its > lasting scars.) Mmmm, good thinking. > Bella (commenting on Harry entering the "Temple of Venus", which I say is equivalent to the "Room of Love" in Harry Potter"): > > "Love it." Not only would Harry be > entering a forbidden room, but would also be so greatly affected by > what he sees. Could this be what drives him to go through the veil? > What is the chronological order of these 2 events in the AC? In "The Alchemical Wedding" Christian Rosycross enters the Sepulchre of Venus on the fifth day and he goes through the Gate of Saturn on the sixth. I don't think Harry will go through the veil to see his mother, but to be with Sirius. > 8. Voldemort will dissipate like an expired Patronus through an act > of love or compassion by Harry. > > Bella: > > How? Do you have any speculations? The mind connection? A spell? > I'm just curious as to what you have in mind As you probably know I'm saying that Harry Potter is not fiction but a symbolic representation of what really happens when you go through the process of alchemical transformation leading to total human liberation. Voldemort personifies the astral power-field that has accumulated around us through all our incarnations. When we go the Path of Liberation, Voldemort opposes us and we have to break through his power-field. We do this by absorbing light of a higher vibration than Voldemort. This forms a new soul inside us. That is Harry. At the same time a new power-field forms around us but inside the old one. That new power-field is Sirius. Harry, the new soul, is made of divine light which is not able to engage in any kind of conflict or battle. God is Love and any kind of fighting or conflict is destructive and against the Divine Law of love. What really happens in a person undergoing the alchemical process is that the apprentice alchemist surrenders himself to the new soul (Harry) in his thoughts, desires and actions. If he really longs for the power of God, he is symbolically calling the stag with his patronus. Calling the stag means your heart thirsts for the divine light, which always comes when you truly long for it. If you do that often and let the new soul make decisions for you, the new power-field (Sirius) inside the old one (Voldemort) will get stronger and stronger, while the old one gets thinner and thinner and weaker and weaker. When things get to a final battle, the Voldemort power-field stages three final attempts to take control of the new soul. We have seen the first one in Book 5. We will see the next two in books 6 and 7. By book 7 Voldemort will actually be very weak, but he will put up a final desperate fight in book 7. I think this will be just like the last temptation of Jesus against Satan in the desert. Voldemort will then be so thin and powerless that the new power-field will just grow and take his place. I just don't know how Jo will weave this into her story, but I think you'll find that the way I've described it above will fit Jo's story more or less. > Bella (commenting on my prediction No. 13 that Dobby will accompany Harry on his final journey): > > Again, left this in because I love itespecially the letters in > Dobby being flip-flopped to become "Bbody." So interesting! I know > JKR says the storyline is set in stone, but I would be quite happy > if she stumbled upon some of your posts and incorporated the ideas > into the books. Well I'm very flattered, but I really think Jo is much better at writing than I am, and I don't think she needs my ideas. As I said above, all I'm doing is telling what I recognise in Harry Potter, and that is the alchemical process of total liberation. That process is taught in Mystery Schools and can be read in books. I know all this sounds incredible, and sometimes I have to pinch myself to believe it, but time and again I recognise the ancient symbols which are found in old liberating texts, like the Greek legends, the New Testament, fairy tales, etc. If my predictions come true it won't be because Jo has seen my ravings, but because Jo and I are on the same road, which neither of us have invented. > Keep gracing us with your beliefsthey are often enlightening. Thanks again, Bella, you've helped me decide I'll start posting my character series to HPfGU. I'll do it slowly so I can cope with the reactions. I want to do it properly! Hans ===== Hans Rieuwers see you at Harry Potter for Seekers http://groups.yahoo.com/group/harrypotterforseekers/ ___________________________________________________________ Win a castle for NYE with your mates and Yahoo! Messenger http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sun Dec 19 21:13:30 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 21:13:30 -0000 Subject: A child is, by definition, WRONG In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120126 HunterGreen wrote: "Perhaps if one of the adults had actually talked to him and told him specifically to contact Snape if he had a vision he would have remembered Snape." And "It is DD's fault. If he had told Harry "Voldemort wants to lure you to the DoM to get something for him, that only you can get." Then Harry would have been much more likely to dismiss the vision as false." Del replies: You're assuming that anyone had foreseen the possibility of LV sending a false vision to Harry, and that DD knew that LV would try and lure Harry into the DoM. But we don't know that. The curse scar connection is a total unknown for everyone, and LV's plans don't seem to have been that clear to the Order. It is very possible that nobody ever imagined that such thing as a false vision could ever happen and that LV would actually go to such desperate ends as to send Harry to the DoM. Del From McGregorMax at ec.rr.com Sun Dec 19 21:14:51 2004 From: McGregorMax at ec.rr.com (mcmaxslb) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 21:14:51 -0000 Subject: Parenting Harry (was: Re: I don't like him much) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120127 Eloise: This thread, from my POV has nothing to do with defending Snape's character, but merely with the observation that (as JKR has written the books) without Snape, there would be no-one effectively challenging Harry's tendency to rule break, no involved adult questioning his "special status". Snape can in no way fill that role. Snape has caused such dislike and contempt between Harry and himself though his sick attempts to get revenge on a dead man though attacks on his son that Harry has absolutely no respect or regard for Snape. Snape lovers point to Snape telling off Harry about Harry's unauthorized trip to Hogmeads, but they refuse to acknowledge that Snape's words ment nothing to Harry because Harry knows that Snape cares nothing for him and this tirade is just another bullying attack. Now when Lupin says just about the same thing then Harry takes it to heart because he respects Lupin and knows that Remus cares about him. Eloise: I don't like bullying. I don't like the way Snape behaves towards Harry and his friends... Then why do you defend Snape? Becaues that is all he is. From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sun Dec 19 21:20:15 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 21:20:15 -0000 Subject: Harry Potter for GROWN-UPS (was Parenting Harry (was: Re: I don't like him much) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120128 mcmaxslb wrote earlier: " And I think I now have a handle on all you Snape lovers, you were in all probably bullies just like Snape and you enjoy seeing Harry being bullied. Takes you back to your school days when you were hurting people doesn't it?" I, Del, replied : "Insulting people who think differently, and seeing things in black-and-white are typical of kids and teenagers, not grown-ups..." mcmaxslb answered: "That paragraph is really hitting home, isn't it?" Del replies: I'm not sure what you mean by that. However I'd like to point out that I have never -to my knowledge- insulted anyone (even insinuating that you have been acting like a teenager is not an insult, it's just an observation), and I try hard never to see things in black and white (I have actually ruffled quite a few feathers over the years with my tendency to introduce some grey in the most obviously black-and-white matters). You, on the other hand, have insinuated that all Snape-lovers were bullies in their youth and that anyone who doesn't agree with your vision of Snape has got it wrong. Del From McGregorMax at ec.rr.com Sun Dec 19 21:25:04 2004 From: McGregorMax at ec.rr.com (mcmaxslb) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 21:25:04 -0000 Subject: Yet another defense of Snape's Occlumency lessons (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120129 delwynmarch wrote: ...Moreover, as I already said, this method DID work Harry DID manage to shake the Legilimency spell off. It was the Imperius Curse that Harry resisted and it was Barty Couch jr who taught him how to do that, not Snape. From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sun Dec 19 21:36:57 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 21:36:57 -0000 Subject: Adults "failing" Harry (was: Themes in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120130 Alla wrote: "I think that Lupinlore meant was Dumblecore CHOOSING to be a leader in anti-Voldemort resistance in general, not just dealing with one particular situation. Do you think anybody FORCED him to be a Leader of OOP?" Del replies: I don't see it that way at all. In my idea, DD and some friends founded the original Order, and those friends all chose DD to be their leader, because of his wisdom, strength, previous experience (defeating Grindelwald) and the fact that he is the only wizard LV ever feared. It's like James being the leader of the Marauders. There was no vote on that matter, it's just that the other three looked up at him as their superior. Alla wrote : "We definitely know that he CHOSE to be a Headmaster, since he refused at some point to become Minister of Magic." Del replies: Well, yes, *precisely* ! DD chose to *remain* Headmaster rather than become the leader of the whole WW. This to me clearly demonstrates that DD does NOT look for leadership responsibilities. He will shoulder them when necessary, but he doesn't go out of his way to get them. Directing a school in such a laid-back way as he does has very little to do with wanting power. So I maintain that DD will not shy away from responsibilities when they come his way and there's nobody else to take them on, but he doesn't look for them. If Sirius hadn't landed himself in Azkaban, I'm sure DD would have consulted with him concerning Harry. Del From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sun Dec 19 21:38:34 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 21:38:34 -0000 Subject: Yet another defense of Snape's Occlumency lessons (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120131 I, Del, wrote: "Moreover, as I already said, this method DID work Harry DID manage to shake the Legilimency spell off." Mcmaxslb answered: "It was the Imperius Curse that Harry resisted and it was Barty Couch jr who taught him how to do that, not Snape." Del replies: Re-read OoP. Del From McGregorMax at ec.rr.com Sun Dec 19 21:45:06 2004 From: McGregorMax at ec.rr.com (mcmaxslb) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 21:45:06 -0000 Subject: Harry Potter for GROWN-UPS (was Parenting Harry (was: Re: I don't like him much) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120132 delwynmarch wrote: I try hard never to see things in black and white (I have actually ruffled quite a few feathers over the years with my tendency to introduce some grey in the most obviously black-and-white matters). Well maybe that is just what is wrong, you introducing gray into matters that are black-and-white. Such as you defending both the Dursley's abuse of Harry and Snape's bullying of him. I didn't think that anyone could defended abusing a child but you sure are trying. Will your next posts defended Voldemort murdering James&Lily and then trying to kill an fourteen month baby. From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sun Dec 19 22:10:18 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 22:10:18 -0000 Subject: Harry Potter for GROWN-UPS (was Parenting Harry (was: Re: I don't like him much) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120133 mcmaxslb wrote: " Well maybe that is just what is wrong," Del replies: Wrong by whose standards? Are you God? mcmaxslb wrote: " you introducing gray into matters that are black-and-white. Such as you defending both the Dursley's abuse of Harry and Snape's bullying of him. I didn't think that anyone could defended abusing a child but you sure are trying. Will your next posts defended Voldemort murdering James&Lily and then trying to kill an fourteen month baby." Del replies: I guess I'm defending child-abusers because I was abused myself. You see, I'm a monster, a wolf hidden under a sheep skin. As for me defending LV, I shudder to think what you're going to think of me if you ever read my Tom Riddle posts... Honestly, you should consider leaving this group, if you're going to react like that any time someone says something slightly controversial, because you're going to make everyone, including yourself, mightily unhappy. Del From R.Vink2 at chello.nl Sun Dec 19 22:21:43 2004 From: R.Vink2 at chello.nl (Renee) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 22:21:43 -0000 Subject: Parenting Harry (was: Re: I don't like him much) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120134 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mcmaxslb" wrote: > > Eloise: > This thread, from my POV has nothing to do with > defending Snape's character, but merely with the observation that (as > JKR has written the books) without Snape, there would be no-one > effectively challenging Harry's tendency to rule break, no involved > adult questioning his "special status". > > > > > Snape can in no way fill that role. Snape has caused such dislike > and contempt between Harry and himself though his sick attempts to > get revenge on a dead man though attacks on his son that Harry has > absolutely no respect or regard for Snape. Snape lovers point to > Snape telling off Harry about Harry's unauthorized trip to Hogmeads, > but they refuse to acknowledge that Snape's words ment nothing to > Harry because Harry knows that Snape cares nothing for him and this > tirade is just another bullying attack. Now when Lupin says just > about the same thing then Harry takes it to heart because he respects > Lupin and knows that Remus cares about him. > > > > Eloise: > I don't like bullying. I don't like the way Snape behaves towards > Harry and his friends... > > mcmaxslb: > Then why do you defend Snape? Becaues that is all he is. Renee: Aren't you overlooking the times Snape protects Harry, or attempts to? It's the discrepancy between the bullying teacher on the one hand and the protector on the other (and the scene mentioned above nicely combines them) that makes Snape ambiguous and interesting. And while the bully deserves criticism, I'd say the protector deserves some acknowledgement, grudging or not. But acknowledging a person's positive traits doesn't mean you think the negative traits are acceptable. On the other hand, I'm not sure that challenging Harry's tendency to break the rules is presented as an altogether positive trait. Especially not as Snape often does so for the wrong reasons (f.i. thinking Harry's a arrogant, spoiled brat whose head is too big for his shoulders). There seems to be strain of anarchy running through the books, or at least the suggestion that breaking rules in a good cause is better than sticking to them under all circumstances. In fact, even Snape himself goes against authority in the person of Umbridge when he judges it necessary. Renee From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Dec 19 22:24:23 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 22:24:23 -0000 Subject: Adults "failing" Harry (was: Themes in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120135 Del replies: Well, yes, *precisely* ! DD chose to *remain* Headmaster rather than become the leader of the whole WW. This to me clearly demonstrates that DD does NOT look for leadership responsibilities. He will shoulder them when necessary, but he doesn't go out of his way to get them. Directing a school in such a laid-back way as he does has very little to do with wanting power. So I maintain that DD will not shy away from responsibilities when they come his way and there's nobody else to take them on, but he doesn't look for them. If Sirius hadn't landed himself in Azkaban, I'm sure DD would have consulted with him concerning Harry. Alla: Well, I disagree. In my mind Dumbleldore CHOSE to remain Headmaster precisely because he thought that he would do better job in leading the resistance there. Just a guess, but do you really doubt that Hogwarts will become anti- resistance center in the next books? I did NOT say that Dumbledore wants power, but I sure think that he does not consider that anyone else can do better job than him in fighting Voldie. I also don't think that Dumbledore would have consulted anybody in the matters concerning Harry. Actually, I stand corrected. if Sirius was not in Azkaban, Dumbledore probably had no other choice, because Sirius was his guardian. But you do remember Minerva making a comment about Dudleys being not the best choice to leave Harry with? How much attention did Dumbledore paid her? He made a decision and he carried it out. Just my opinion. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Dec 19 22:29:10 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 22:29:10 -0000 Subject: Parenting Harry (was: Re: I don't like him much) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120136 > Renee: snip. On the other hand, I'm not sure that challenging Harry's tendency to break the rules is presented as an altogether positive trait. Especially not as Snape often does so for the wrong reasons (f.i. thinking Harry's a arrogant, spoiled brat whose head is too big for his shoulders). There seems to be strain of anarchy running through the books, or at least the suggestion that breaking rules in a good cause is better than sticking to them under all circumstances. In fact, even Snape himself goes against authority in the person of Umbridge when he judges it necessary. Alla: Precisely, Renee. To me one of the main messages of the series that for the good, noble purpose rules should be broken, could be brokem and ARE broken. Of course it depends on particular purpose and particular rule, but I am not at all sure that JKR approves of Snape putting Harry down for his rule breaking. That is just my take, of course. Sure, when Harry breaks the rules for fun, then yes, but otherwise - I am not sure. Just my opinion. From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sun Dec 19 22:38:37 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 22:38:37 -0000 Subject: Adults "failing" Harry (was: Themes in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120137 Alla wrote: "In my mind Dumbleldore CHOSE to remain Headmaster precisely because he thought that he would do better job in leading the resistance there." Del replies: I'm not sure I understand you. DD was offered the Ministry after the end of VWI, after the first defeat of LV. So I'm not sure what resistance you're talking about? Not to mention that DD would lead a much more efficient resistance if he were in control of the Ministry. Alla wrote: " Just a guess, but do you really doubt that Hogwarts will become anti-resistance center in the next books?" Del replies: You mean anti-LV? Hogwarts will be one center, for sure, but I don't know if it will be the only one. I don't think the Order's Headquarters will be at Hogwarts, so that would indicate that there will be at least 2 centers of resistance. Alla wrote: "I did NOT say that Dumbledore wants power, but I sure think that he does not consider that anyone else can do better job than him in fighting Voldie." Del replies: Do we know that he's wrong? Alla wrote: "But you do remember Minerva making a comment about Dudleys being not the best choice to leave Harry with? How much attention did Dumbledore paid her? He made a decision and he carried it out." Del replies: Minerva hadn't been told about the most crucial element in DD's decision : the Blood Charm protection. And she didn't seem too convinced that LV would come back either. Not to mention that we don+t know how much she knew about Harry and LV, since it seems she wasn't even in the original Order. So I would say that her opinion was thoroughly misinformed, and that it's quite normal that DD dismissed it in those circumstances. And DD wouldn't have had to take any decision to start with if James and Sirius hadn't engineered the Secret-Keeper Switch disaster. DD *had* to take a decision, one that could have eternal consequences, and he went for safety. Del From juli17 at aol.com Sun Dec 19 22:39:39 2004 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 17:39:39 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Digest Number 5557 Message-ID: <1f4.379426a.2ef75d2b@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120138 mcmaxslb wrote: > > And I think I now have a handle on all you Snape lovers, you were > in all probably bullies just like Snape and you enjoy seeing Harry > being bullied. Takes you back to your school days when you were > hurting people doesn't it? > mcmaxslb, may I respectfully ask you not to insult others who may have a different viewpoint than you, or who find aspects or characters in HP of interest which you don't share? If you think about what you wrote above, I hope you will realize that your supposition is not only untrue but reflects very badly on you, not on those you are categorizing so negatively. Please also remember, we are discussing characters in a book. Just because we express a fascination with Snape (I include myself in that group) that does not mean we approve of his behavior or that we would have anything to do with a person like Snape in real life. And if we see different aspects to his behavior, or try to point out the good in him (admittedly he hides that part well!), and hope for a redemption of character by the end of the series, that does brand us bullies. Quite the opposite, I think, in our wishing to see a bully redeemed. Julie (who supports the end of bullying everywhere) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sun Dec 19 22:43:04 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 22:43:04 -0000 Subject: Parenting Harry (was: Re: I don't like him much) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120139 Alla wrote: " Precisely, Renee. To me one of the main messages of the series that for the good, noble purpose rules should be broken, could be brokem and ARE broken." Del replies: I agree. But I find it quite unnerving, because this kind of behaviour can easily lead to total anarchy when things become a bit rough like they are becoming in the Potterverse, because not everybody ever agrees on what "good, noble purposes" are. I wonder if JKR will tackle that matter in the last books? Del From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Dec 19 22:43:02 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 22:43:02 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore In charge. Was: Re: Adults "failing" Harry (was: Themes in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120140 Alla wrote previously: "In my mind Dumbleldore CHOSE to remain Headmaster precisely because he thought that he would do better job in leading the resistance there." > Del replies: I'm not sure I understand you. DD was offered the Ministry after the end of VWI, after the first defeat of LV. So I'm not sure what resistance you're talking about? Not to mention that DD would lead a much more efficient resistance if he were in control of the Ministry. Alla: I don't remember the quote, but I am almost positive that Dumbledore says somewhere that he was sure that Voldie will return some day, so I think he was making long time contingency plans. Alla wrote previously: "I did NOT say that Dumbledore wants power, but I sure think that he does not consider that anyone else can do better job than him in fighting Voldie." Del replies: Do we know that he's wrong? Alla: We don't know one way or another, but when did it ever stop us from speculating? :o) From R.Vink2 at chello.nl Sun Dec 19 22:45:59 2004 From: R.Vink2 at chello.nl (Renee) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 22:45:59 -0000 Subject: Parenting Harry (was: Re: I don't like him much) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120141 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > > Renee: > > > snip. > > On the other hand, I'm not sure that challenging Harry's tendency to > break the rules is presented as an altogether positive trait. > Especially not as Snape often does so for the wrong reasons (f.i. > thinking Harry's a arrogant, spoiled brat whose head is too big for > his shoulders). There seems to be strain of anarchy running through > the books, or at least the suggestion that breaking rules in a good > cause is better than sticking to them under all circumstances. In > fact, even Snape himself goes against authority in the person of > Umbridge when he judges it necessary. > > > > Alla: > > Precisely, Renee. To me one of the main messages of the series that > for the good, noble purpose rules should be broken, could be brokem > and ARE broken. > > Of course it depends on particular purpose and particular rule, but > I am not at all sure that JKR approves of Snape putting Harry down > for his rule breaking. That is just my take, of course. > > Sure, when Harry breaks the rules for fun, then yes, but otherwise - > I am not sure. > > > Just my opinion. Renee: Not just yours, Alla. What JKR shows is that Snape's motives for putting Harry down are less than pure; they're laced with antipathy. Harry knows this, and that's why Snape's method is so ineffective. Lupin's rebuke in PoA is effective precisely because Harry knows he has Lupin's sympathy (even though Lupin's rebuke is tainted, too, be it for a different reason; by his silence about Padfoot he endangers Harry just as much as Harry does himself sneaking around with the Marauder's Map). From juli17 at aol.com Sun Dec 19 22:42:10 2004 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 17:42:10 EST Subject: Apologies! Message-ID: <9b.5521bcf1.2ef75dc2@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120142 My apologies for not changing the subject line in my previous post! Sorry for any confusion, Julie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From R.Vink2 at chello.nl Sun Dec 19 22:51:32 2004 From: R.Vink2 at chello.nl (Renee) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 22:51:32 -0000 Subject: Parenting Harry (was: Re: I don't like him much) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120143 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: > > Alla wrote: > " Precisely, Renee. To me one of the main messages of the series that > for the good, noble purpose rules should be broken, could be brokem > and ARE broken." > > Del replies: > I agree. But I find it quite unnerving, because this kind of behaviour > can easily lead to total anarchy when things become a bit rough like > they are becoming in the Potterverse, because not everybody ever > agrees on what "good, noble purposes" are. I wonder if JKR will tackle > that matter in the last books? > Renee: Maybe it's no coincidence that the book where DD openly turns anarchist, opposing a Ministry official and taking out Ministry aurors, is also the book where DD screws up and proves fallible? From McGregorMax at ec.rr.com Sun Dec 19 22:52:50 2004 From: McGregorMax at ec.rr.com (mcmaxslb) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 22:52:50 -0000 Subject: Harry Potter for GROWN-UPS (was Parenting Harry (was: Re: I don't like him much) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120144 > mcmaxslb wrote: > " Well maybe that is just what is wrong," > > Del replies: > Wrong by whose standards? Are you God? I don't need to be God to have a sense of right and wrong. > mcmaxslb wrote: > " you introducing gray into matters that are black-and-white. Such >as you defending both the Dursley's abuse of Harry and Snape's >bullying of him. I didn't think that anyone could defend abusing a >child but you sure are trying. Will your next posts defended >Voldemort murdering James&Lily and then trying to kill an fourteen >month baby." > Del replies: > I guess I'm defending child-abusers because I was abused myself. You > see, I'm a monster, a wolf hidden under a sheep skin. You claim abuse and yet you defend abusers, intersting. Del replies: > As for me defending LV, I shudder to think what you're going to think of me if you ever read my Tom Riddle posts... So you have defended murder and attempted murder of a child. Del replies: > Honestly, you should consider leaving this group, if you're going to > react like that any time someone says something slightly > controversial, because you're going to make everyone, including > yourself, mightily unhappy. I'm not going anywhere. And if you can't handle someone challenging you instead of agreeing then you are going to be the unhappy one, deal with it. From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sun Dec 19 22:59:25 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 22:59:25 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore In charge. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120145 Alla wrote: " I don't remember the quote, but I am almost positive that Dumbledore says somewhere that he was sure that Voldie will return some day, so I think he was making long time contingency plans. " Del replies: Wouldn't making long time contingency plans have included taking over the Ministry and filling it with as many loyal followers as possible? Imagine a Ministry where Shacklebolt is leading the Aurors and where Arthur is directing a department, for a start. Not to mention no Umbridge to send Dementors after Harry, of course. Wouldn't that have been a much better situation to face the return of LV than the real situation? If anything, refusing the Ministry seems to have been a rather foolish decision. Minerva, among others, would have been a good enough Headmistress. DD would have been much more useful at the Ministry than at Hogwarts. But I guess he chose Hogwarts because he wanted to be there for Harry when the time would come. Alla wrote : "We don't know one way or another, but when did it ever stop us from speculating? :o)" Del replies: LOL ! Del From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Dec 19 23:00:00 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 23:00:00 -0000 Subject: Harry Potter for GROWN-UPS (was Parenting Harry (was: Re: I don't like him much) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120146 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mcmaxslb" wrote: >You claim abuse and yet you defend abusers, intersting. Alla: OK, I usually ask this question in extreme situations only, but have you EVER heard about difference between fiction and RL? You know, many people like evil characters in the books because they are interestingly written. It surely does not equal them liking such people in RL. Mcmaxslb: > So you have defended murder and attempted murder of a child. Alla: Nope, she did not. But suppose she did, so what? It is FICTIONAL murder after all. From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sun Dec 19 23:10:37 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 23:10:37 -0000 Subject: Harry Potter for GROWN-UPS In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120147 Mcmaxslb wrote: " I don't need to be God to have a sense of right and wrong." Del replies: Agreed. But unless you're God, nobody else has any obligation to agree with your personal sense of right and wrong. I too have a sense of right and wrong. It's obviously not exactly similar to yours, but I'm satisfied with it. Seeing as there is no higher authority to declare yours better than mine or vice versa, it seems like we're not going to get anywhere. So what do you suggest we do? mcmaxslb wrote: " You claim abuse and yet you defend abusers, intersting. " Del replies: Interesting is the word indeed. I happen to know by very personal experience that many abusers are not evil people. They have done evil things, but they are not evil people. In fact many of them are good people who have one very dark side. A significant number of them are also abuse victims themselves. People are most definitely not black-and-white, and I do find that interesting indeed. I, Del, wrote earlier: "As for me defending LV, I shudder to think what you're going to think of me if you ever read my Tom Riddle posts..." mcmaxslb answered: "So you have defended murder and attempted murder of a child." Del replies: Actually I haven't. You would know that if you took the time to read my posts before assuming you know what's in them. Mcmaxslb wrote: "And if you can't handle someone challenging you instead of agreeing then you are going to be the unhappy one, deal with it." Del replies: LOL ! You're funny :-) Del From ejblack at rogers.com Mon Dec 20 00:20:17 2004 From: ejblack at rogers.com (Jeanette) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 00:20:17 -0000 Subject: Naked house elves/questions Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120148 Considering this and that, it suddenly occurred to me, where do house elves get their clothes? They all seem to wear a variation of a pillowcase with holes for the arms and legs. If no one can give a house elf clothes I guess they must make their own. Are their families allowed to give them the cloth? Do they have to scavenge discarded rags? Also, do house elves get married? If one house elf belongs to one house and the other belongs to another house, how do they manage? The Black family house seemed to have generations of house elf heads mounted in the hallway, do house elves only have one child? If there are more in the elf family, do they work for the same house or perhaps go to houses of their master's children? Jeanette (After seeing Dobby in the movie, I would pay a quarter NOT to see a house elf naked) From McGregorMax at ec.rr.com Mon Dec 20 00:54:54 2004 From: McGregorMax at ec.rr.com (mcmaxslb) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 00:54:54 -0000 Subject: Digest Number 5557 In-Reply-To: <1f4.379426a.2ef75d2b@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120149 And I think I now have a handle on all you Snape lovers, you were in all probably bullies just like Snape and you enjoy seeing Harry being bullied. Takes you back to your school days when you were hurting people doesn't it? julii17 at a : wrote mcmaxslb, may I respectfully ask you not to insult others.... I was just making an observation it was not in any way meant as an insult.OK I'll take back the part about all Snape lovers being bullies. However it has touched a nerve with a allot of people and maybe they need to look at why it did. Please also remember, we are discussing characters in a book. Just because we express a fascination with Snape (I include myself in that group) that does not mean we approve of his behavior...Julie Snape is an interesting character with some intriguing questions around him. But I can't just let by the fact that so many find this despicable character admirable, in that they condone his abusive, bullying treatment of children. From McGregorMax at ec.rr.com Mon Dec 20 01:37:29 2004 From: McGregorMax at ec.rr.com (mcmaxslb) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 01:37:29 -0000 Subject: Harry Potter for GROWN-UPS In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120150 Mcmaxslb wrote: " I don't need to be God to have a sense of right and wrong." Del replies: Agreed. But unless you're God, nobody else has any obligation to agree with your personal sense of right and wrong. I too have a sense of right and wrong. It's obviously not exactly similar to yours, but I'm satisfied with it. Seeing as there is no higher authority to declare yours better than mine or vice versa, it seems like we're not going to get anywhere. So what do you suggest we do? Right and wrong are not as subjective as you like to think. mcmaxslb wrote: " You claim abuse and yet you defend abusers, intersting. " Del replies: Interesting is the word indeed. I happen to know by very personal experience that many abusers are not evil people. They have done evil things, but they are not evil people. In fact many of them are good people who have one very dark side. A significant number of them are also abuse victims themselves. People are most definitely not black-and-white, and I do find that interesting indeed. Good people do not do evil things. I too know abuse victoms and they have never hurt anyone. I, Del, wrote earlier: "As for me defending LV, I shudder to think what you're going to think of me if you ever read my Tom Riddle posts..." mcmaxslb answered: "So you have defended murder and attempted murder of a child." Del replies: Actually I haven't. You would know that if you took the time to read my posts before assuming you know what's in them. And maybe you shouldn't give the innuendo that you condone it. Mcmaxslb wrote: "And if you can't handle someone challenging you instead of agreeing then you are going to be the unhappy one, deal with it." Del replies: LOL ! You're funny :-) You're not. From steve51445 at adelphia.net Mon Dec 20 01:41:27 2004 From: steve51445 at adelphia.net (Steve) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 20:41:27 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Naked house elves/questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041220014110.DDN25543.mta10.adelphia.net@steveupstairs> No: HPFGUIDX 120151 >Jeanette: > Where do house elves get their clothes? If no one can give a >house elf clothes I guess they must make their own. Are their >families allowed to give them the cloth? Do they have to scavenge >discarded rags? Steve here: I've always thought that the elves scrounged their clothes from scraps, maybe passed down from generation to generation. After all, a badly clothed house elf is still better than a naked one. Dobby's masters were the Malfoy family, Winky's were the Crouches, and Kreacher's master was Sirius. Who is the master of the Hogwarts house elves? I figured that either the staff or maybe the MOM 'owned' the elves, but not the students. If the students don't 'own' the elves then Hermione couldn't set any elves free no matter how hard she tried. Maybe that's why none of the teachers seem to be trying to stop her from setting them free. Of course the elves find clothes shameful, and stop cleaning Gryffindor tower after finding the hats and socks, but would those clothes really have set them free? Steve Who wants to thank Jeanette for putting the image of a naked Dobby in my head. -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.296 / Virus Database: 265.6.0 - Release Date: 12/17/2004 From bob.oliver at cox.net Mon Dec 20 01:44:52 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 01:44:52 -0000 Subject: Adults "failing" Harry (was: Themes in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120152 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: > Del replies: > I disagree. DD did not *choose* to take on those responsibilities. Absolutely true and absolutely irrelevant. Once Dumbledore took it upon himself to make these profound decisions, the responsibility for their outcome adhered to him. Whether he wanted to make these decisions or not is of no consequence whatsoever with regard to the blame that he bears. If > anyone let the balls drop, it was James and Sirius, when they came up > with the alternate Secret-Keeper plan *without consulting or even > informing DD*. Then James and Lily got killed, and Sirius (Harry's > *only* legal alternate guardian) got sent to Azkaban. DD had to deal > quickly with the messy aftermath of a situation he was in no way > responsible for. Once again, absolutely irrelevant. Dumbledore made the decisions, Dumbledore must bear the blame for the consequences. That may not be perfectly fair, it may not be perfectly reasonable, but it is utterly true and utterly necessary. No one can take it upon themselves to make such profound decisions about another person's life without bearing the responsibility for the outcome of their decisions. > > Moreover, DD cannot trust anybody, because the events of Godric's > Hollow showed clearly that he can be fooled and anybody can be a traitor. > > Del Once again, irrelevant to the blame that Dumbledore bears. Those who bear the onus of command *cannot* avoid taking responsibility for what happens as a result of their decisions. Dumbledore faces up to that in OOTP, and he has my respect for it. He has a lot more facing up to do, however. From moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com Mon Dec 20 02:06:40 2004 From: moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com (K G) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 18:06:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Harry Potter for GROWN-UPS (was Parenting Harry (was: Re: I don't like him much) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041220020640.75434.qmail@web53510.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120153 mcmaxslb wrote: I'm not going anywhere. And if you can't handle someone challenging you instead of agreeing then you are going to be the unhappy one, deal with it. IIRC, this group is here to discuss canon of the JKR book series, not to allow people to throw insults at other posters when personal oppinions do not agree with their own. If you can offer canon examples of the point that you are trying to get across and not your own personal morals, then we would be happy to hear them. Until then, please keep insults to yourself. This is a discussion based on fictional characters and has nothing to do with real life and real life values. There are other forums for that discussion. People here come from many parts of the world with many viewpoints and we all try to respect that. moonmyyst (climbing off of my soap box and hoping the list elves do not lob snipping snowballs at me again) __________________________________________________ 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 nkafkafi at yahoo.com Mon Dec 20 02:09:37 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 02:09:37 -0000 Subject: You're in the Army, now. wasFalse Alarm? Was:Re: Adults "failing" Harry (in tP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120154 > Del replies : > About that question above : it does seem clear after reading your post > that Sirius knew about the Prophecy by the time of the DoM battle. > However : > > 1. He could have been told about it very recently. Maybe someone else > in the Order knew about it, and when the Order was contacted and told > about Harry being gone and missing, maybe that someone explained what > was in the DoM. > > 2. Sirius might have known for a very long time. If the Potters knew, > then James might have told his very best friend. But DD might have > asked him not to tell anyone else. > Neri: Still, during the talk in 12GP in the beginning of the year, we have: * * * * "It's not down to you to decide what's good for Harry!" said Mrs Weasley sharply. The expression on her normally kind face looked dangerous. "You haven't forgotten what Dumbledore said, I suppose?" "Which bit?" Sirius asked politely, but with the air of a man readying himself for a fight. "The bit about not telling Harry more than he needs to know," said Mrs Weasley, placing a heavy emphasis on the last three words. * * * * So DD told then not to tell Harry specifically (not generally "the kids"), and Sirius, Molly and later Arthur and Lupin obviously know what it is. So what is it? Merely the knowledge that LV wants something in the DoM? That knowledge by itself doesn't endanger Harry. And we have more in the end of this same talk: * * * * "What's he after apart from followers?" Harry asked swiftly. He thought he saw Sirius and Lupin exchange the most fleeting of looks before Sirius answered. "Stuff he can only get by stealth." When Harry continued to look puzzled, Sirius said, "Like a weapon. Something he didn't have last time." "When he was powerful before?" "Yes." "Like what kind of weapon?" said Harry. "Something worse than the Avada Kedavra ? ?" " That's enough!" Mrs Weasley spoke from the shadows beside the door. Harry hadn't noticed her return from taking Ginny upstairs. Her arms were crossed and she looked furious. "I want you in bed, now. All of you," she added, looking around at Fred, George, Ron and Hermione. "You can't boss us ? " Fred began. "Watch me," snarled Mrs Weasley. She was trembling slightly as she looked at Sirius. "You've given Harry plenty of information. Any more and you might just as well induct him into the Order straightaway." * * * * So Sirius and Lupin know that it is something LV didn't have last time, and they know more than that, which is the part that Molly stops them from telling, and she implies that anybody who is inducted into the Order knows this part. And why is it Molly, of all the Order members, who objects here so emotionally? She's not the only one who cares about security breaches, but she is the one who cares about Harry's innocence. > Del replies : > I just wish we knew *for sure*! If I've learned one thing about the HP > books, it's not to assume what is not clearly written, so I'm feeling > a bit uncomfortable assuming that all the Order members knew about the > Prophecy and yet none of them told Harry anything about it. > Neri: There are all kinds of reasons why some things are not clearly written. Like JKR not telling us in the end of GoF that Harry broke into the DADA office and got the Marauder's Map back. It was just too much to put into the short ending after the climax, and JKR thought it would be obvious. It could be the same thing here. There's just not enough emotional room in the ending of OotP for an Order member to explain that they knew all along. > Del replies : > Once again, this makes a lot of sense. But the problem is : we haven't > been told what reason DD gave to the Order for implementing the > Occlumency lessons. It might have been a very compelling reason that > had nothing to do with the Prophecy, like presenting the dangers a > possessed!Harry could represent for the Order as a whole, or even > simply the fix the Order could be in if LV accessed Harry's memories > of 12GP and the Order. Neri: But Harry already knew about these reasons when talking to Sirius and Lupin in Umbridge's fire, so why didn't they tell him "you must learn Occlumency to guard your mind from Voldemort!" or "you must learn Occlumency to guard the Order's secrets from Voldemort!" Instead they just tell him "you must learn Occlumency because nothing is more important than that! Do you understand me? Nothing!" Why be so vague when they want to pass such a critical message? It really does make them sound like hysterical overprotective grownups. As I say, it is not 100% certain, but I'd say it is at least 95% certain that they know that there's a prophecy in the DoM, that only Harry and Voldy can retrieve it, and that it says only Harry can vanquish Voldy. It is also obvious DD told them very specifically not to tell Harry. And it would be very strange if Sirius, Lupin, Arthur and Molly know this, but Snape doesn't. Neri From dontask2much at yahoo.com Mon Dec 20 02:10:44 2004 From: dontask2much at yahoo.com (charme) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 21:10:44 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Digest Number 5557 References: Message-ID: <003301c4e639$1da42ec0$6701a8c0@MITRE.ORG> No: HPFGUIDX 120155 From: "mcmaxslb" > And I think I now have a handle on all you Snape lovers, you were > in all probably bullies just like Snape and you enjoy seeing Harry > being bullied. Takes you back to your school days when you were > hurting people doesn't it? > > I was just making an observation it was not in any way meant as an > insult.OK I'll take back the part about all Snape lovers being > bullies. However it has touched a nerve with a allot of people and > maybe they need to look at why it did. >> Please also remember, we are discussing characters in a book. >> Just because we express a fascination with Snape (I include >> myself in that group) that does not mean we approve of his >> behavior...Julie charme: Ok pick me, my hand is up :) Your note, mcmaxslb, didn't touch any nerves at all with me, although I did get a chuckle out of your latter point about "why" because that is so simple to answer. :) I remember teachers I had in school who acted like Snape: I didn't like them when I had them, and I certainly don't agree with his behavior at all in a real person. (I grew up where teachers had the right to paddle students, and I believe some rather relished administering punishment.) I can say though that in my more "mature" years, I always wondered what made people like that tick; the infinite "why" someone like that acted the way he/she did. I dig Snape as a character in a septology I like who has the "why" factor and would like to see more of my questions about him answered. Given that, does that make me a bad person? Nope. It makes me curious and interested in knowing "why" and how this person, no matter how much I disagree with his behavior, relates to the plot of books I enjoy. > Snape is an interesting character with some intriguing questions > around him. But I can't just let by the fact that so many find this > despicable character admirable, in that they condone his abusive, > bullying treatment of children. charme: I don't know about it being "fact" that so many find Snape admirable, and think perhaps considering a different alternative perspective than you may have might be more appropriate. People in their zealousness to see both sides of the Harry/Snape equasion getting their individual points across via a virtual medium like this message board can be taken out of context. Plus, one has to admire JKR for including the real-life sort of personalities one might encounter growing up - both the good and the bad. From bob.oliver at cox.net Mon Dec 20 02:11:49 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 02:11:49 -0000 Subject: OKAY, let's all just take a chill pill Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120156 Okay everybody, I daresay that this is the House Elves job, but why don't we all just take a few breaths. NOW: 1) There is a difference between fiction and real life; 2) Those who find certain abusive/evil/etc. characters interesting in fiction are in no way advocating or defending their actions and would not be allies of them in RL. (I, for example, find Sauron in LOTR a fascinating figure, but I wouldn't want to play cards with him.) ON THE OTHER HAND: 1) There ARE real issues with some of the themes brought up in the HP books, in OOTP in particular, where there sometimes seems to be a subtle and not so subtle message that abuse is OK in a good cause and that emotional health is not important as long as the job gets done; 2) Those who find these themes disturbing, problematic, and pernicious are not being silly, deluded, hysterical, over-the-top, or ignorant of the definition of fiction. I personally think a lot of this arises from the fact that JKR assumes we know what she means when in fact what she means is often very unclear (combined with the fact that OOTP was written under an enormous amount of pressure and badly needed better editing). I could be very wrong, however. I think I am on stronger ground in saying that we ALL often assume that other people understand what we mean, when in fact our meaning is often not at all clear either from our words or the context of our messages. This problem seems to flare up particularly with regard to Snape, the Dursleys, and Dumbledore's actions/failures with regard to Harry. Perhaps when dealing with these subjects, which we have abundant evidence are controversial and tend to involve deep emotions, it would be best to think several times before hitting the "Send" key as well as making sure we have made ourselves clear. If that means being redundant, PC, and preachy, so be it. It's worth a little preachiness and redundancy to avoid a lot of spewing, spitting, and anger that only ends up creating very bad feelings all the way around. Lupinlore From imamommy at sbcglobal.net Mon Dec 20 02:56:15 2004 From: imamommy at sbcglobal.net (imamommy at sbcglobal.net) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 02:56:15 -0000 Subject: Parenting Harry (was: Re: I don't like him much) In-Reply-To: <20041219170615.55598.qmail@web53104.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120157 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Magda Grantwich wrote: > --- eloise_herisson wrote: > > > However, the argument I was making was that Snape is the only one > > who *consistentely* disciplines Harry and ties to curb his rule > > breaking tendencies and that even Lupin, who cares deeply for Harry > > > and does attempt to exercise some control over him, ultimately > > fails in this role. How does Lupin's giving the Map back to Harry > > out of nostalgia contradict that? imamommy: Look, IMO only, I think that most (not all!)of the Trio's rulebreaking is, in their minds at least, for a greater good. Harry usually has good reasons for breaking rules. Maybe it's because I had clueless parents and had to sort of chart my own course, but Harry's independent tendencies strike a chord for me. I think Lupin identifies with Harry, and knows that there will be good uses for the map in the future. Also, Lupin helped make the map. So he may not feel there is anything wrong in using it. He doesn't feel the need to control Harry's every move, and nor do I. I don't think that adds up to bad influence, just to trusting Harry to make up his own mind. > > > > ~Eloise > > > I agree with Eloise - great post, by the way. > > Lupin is one of those characters who's gone down in my estimation as > the series has progressed. Not as far down as Molly, who I dislike > quite strongly, but enough to make me think that Lupin's lack of > involvement in Harry's life is probably a good thing for Harry. imamommy: Interesting, because I like Lupin's method's and I like Molly even more. > I don't think Snape gets nearly enough credit for his "demented > mother hen" act for Harry. Yes he's snide and insulting when > reminding Harry of Harry's youth and lack of experience and all the > rest, and yes, he's a big old meany-head. But he's right about an > awful lot of stuff and if you get past his cutting edge, there's a > lot of sound common sense too. > imamommy But I don't see it as "demented mother hen," because I don't think Snape's motivation is to teach or protect Harry. I think it is to punish him and keep him downtrodden. > His raking down of Harry in POA over his going into Hogsmeade is > actually quite accurate. There are a lot of people giving up their > time and energy to keep Harry safe - I'm sure the teachers just love > working a whole day, grading essays or tests in the evening and then > taking night shifts to look out for Sirius Black. And there's never > a hint that Harry ever thinks about this aspect of things, that these > people are putting themselves out for him. All he does is pout about > the unfairness of not going to Hogsmeade. Frankly if I was a teacher > with no particular closeness to the Potter family, I might be more > than a little ticked at Harry's refusal to co-operate until Black was > found. imamommy Firstly, why didn't Snape turn Harry over to McGonagall? Snape didn't need to be involved in punishing him (and I'm sure MM would have done an adequate job, even in his eyes). I think Snape was issuing vengeance, not discipline. Secondly, yes, Harry's disregard for the rules in this instance is frankly dangerous, especially over what seems so trivial in our minds. But think about the importance of this in a 13-yr-old's life. He still deserves to be treated with respect, IMO, and Snape never gives him that. (Big sigh!) I don't hate Snape. I have compassion for him and what he may have suffered. But I am of the opinion that he is carrying a personal vendetta against Harry too far. He sometimes makes a good point, but I don't think his motivation is to help Harry in any way. Unless it's all an act. imamommy From karentheunicorn at msn.com Sun Dec 19 16:38:49 2004 From: karentheunicorn at msn.com (KAREN OGBURN) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 11:38:49 -0500 Subject: Yet another defense of Snape's Occlumency lessons (long) References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120159 I'm a first time poster here so bear with me if I don't do a very good job of it. I'm also a new fan to the Harry Potter world so my take on things might be completely wrong here. I read part of the OOTP because I've been reading everyone's comments on the subject, though I've probably missed a few so if this has been covered before please forgive. I myself after OOTP grew to feel a bit sad for and like him a little more Snape, in seeing the images from his memory Harry saw I am led to think he is an abused person as a child and as a teenager so I'm left to wonder about him like everyone else. But being that we are always kept wondering about him as a character is he really on the good side even though DD trusts him still leaves that unsure feeling. Considering this I think about Harry...If you think on it consider his first 11 years of life. Unloved, abused by his Aunt, Uncle, Cousin. He was left alone with nobody and nothing. To this I am thinking, isn't he abused also? Don't he and Snape have something in common? It's no wonder Harry is now acting out and being irrational and angry, why wouldn't he be. If you think about it...say you adopt a child...An adopted child I would think would not want to do anything wrong..they would try to please and be perfect in fear of being rejected by new family. But everyone makes mistakes and gets mad so eventually things are bound to happen and the child will relax and not try to be so perfect once they know they are somewhat safe. So using this as an example, maybe Harry is coming out of that fear of being sent away and expelled from Hogwarts and finally letting his emotions out. I could be completely wrong on this, it is just a thought. Now from the books we would say for 5 years he's had friends, done some interesting stuff and very brave stuff....But what kind of scar does he still have from all those years of no love and nobody caring for him. In a way he and Snape are a lot alike I think....but since we have little to go on about Snape's true nature or should I say how he got his true nature. I'm still left wondering. But assuming he was an abused child it would stand to reason that he and Harry do have a lot in common...and I have noticed that people who are a lot alike tend to fight sometimes IRL. But I am giving Snape the benefit of the doubt here and considering him a good guy till I read otherwise...well maybe good guy is too strong a word. hump...I don't know. Most of the time in the Book OOTP I was left with the strong desire to slap some of the characters and tell them would you just please communicate...but I have thought that in my own life about people I know so..hum...Obviously the book is pretty good at capturing those moments. I also in some way know how Harry feels...I also had a Teacher that was an evil greasy Git...so I can attest to how Potter feels and totally understand it, even now as an adult I have thoughts of being stuck in the man's class. So I am thinking there are just some people we can't get along with for whatever reason and Harry and Snape are just a pair that...even though have situations that seem similar they just rub each other the wrong way. Perhaps Book 6 will clear up a lot of my ponderings and wonderings...I don't know. But anyway I hope my first post wasn't too lame... Karen From heos at virgilio.it Sun Dec 19 18:57:44 2004 From: heos at virgilio.it (chrusotoxos) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 18:57:44 -0000 Subject: Is Snape really that good at Occlumency? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120160 Ok, maybe I got it wrong, but I always assumed that what LV did to Harry at the end of Ootp was not, strictly speaking, Legilimency, but some form of Dark Magic, soul possession or similar stuff. And yes, the love Harry felt for Sirius saved him from Dark Magic just as Lily's love had saved him before, but we're not talking about Occlumency here. IMO, Snape was not lying. The ability to hide emotions would have been useful for Harry, as the whole trap in the Department of Mysteries was prepared on stuff stealed from him and then given to him via Legilmency. If Harry had learned to shut his mind, he would never have dreamed about Sirius. So we're mixing two things here, imo. Chrusotoxos From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Dec 20 03:09:23 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 03:09:23 -0000 Subject: Parenting Harry (was: Re: I don't like him much) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120161 > imamommy: snip. I think Lupin identifies with Harry, and knows that there will be good uses for the map in the future. Also, Lupin helped make the map. So he may not feel there is anything wrong in using it. He doesn't feel the need to control Harry's every move, and nor do I. I don't think that adds up to bad influence, just to trusting Harry to make up his own mind. Alla: Indeed and as we see in GoF Harry really put the map to good use. Imamommy > > But I don't see it as "demented mother hen," because I don't think > Snape's motivation is to teach or protect Harry. I think it is to > punish him and keep him downtrodden. Alla: Absolutely agree. Actually, it IS Snape's duty as a teacher to protect all of his students, so if he does not let one of his students to be killed - it is his obligation, sort of,IMO. Imamommy snip. (Big sigh!) I don't hate Snape. I have compassion for him and what he may have suffered. But I am of the opinion that he is carrying a personal vendetta against Harry too far. He sometimes makes a good point, but I don't think his motivation is to help Harry in any way. Unless it's all an act. Alla: What I said many times. I love Snape's character as a whole, but when I look at him within the story I partially love and partially hate him. I have pity for him, I want him to be redeemed, I admire his anti- Voldemort's efforts, but I don't SYMPATHISE with him one bit for having irrational feelings of jealousy and hate towards a child. And of course it is only my opinion that he has those feelings towards Harry. From imamommy at sbcglobal.net Mon Dec 20 03:08:57 2004 From: imamommy at sbcglobal.net (imamommy at sbcglobal.net) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 03:08:57 -0000 Subject: Naked house elves/questions In-Reply-To: <20041220014110.DDN25543.mta10.adelphia.net@steveupstairs> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120162 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > > >Jeanette: > > Where do house elves get their clothes? If no one can give a > >house elf clothes I guess they must make their own. Are their > >families allowed to give them the cloth? Do they have to scavenge > >discarded rags? > > Steve here: > I've always thought that the elves scrounged their clothes from > scraps, maybe passed down from generation to generation. After all, a badly > clothed house elf is still better than a naked one. > Dobby's masters were the Malfoy family, Winky's were the Crouches, > and Kreacher's master was Sirius. Who is the master of the Hogwarts house > elves? I figured that either the staff or maybe the MOM 'owned' the elves, > but not the students. If the students don't 'own' the elves then Hermione > couldn't set any elves free no matter how hard she tried. Maybe that's why > none of the teachers seem to be trying to stop her from setting them free. > Of course the elves find clothes shameful, and stop cleaning Gryffindor > tower after finding the hats and socks, but would those clothes really have > set them free? > > Steve > Who wants to thank Jeanette for putting the image of a naked Dobby in my > head. > imamommy: Thank goodness, something to put a smile on our faces! In Goblet of Fire, Scholastic Edition,on p.376, it states: "At least a hundred little elves were standing around the kitchen , beaming, bowing, and curtseying as Dobby led Harry past them. They were all wearing the same uniform: a tea towel stamped with the Hogwarts crest, and tied, as Winky's had been, like a toga." So it seems to me that "clothes" means clothes; actual articles of clothing. It would appear that an employer/master can provide non- clothing, such as a towel, pillowsheet, etc. to wear. I would guess that the state of Dobby's pillowsheet was due to the Malfoy's cruelty/neglect; the Hogwarts tea towels a mark of being well cared for. Another house elf question: who do the Hogwarts house elves serve, directly? DD? Whomever happens to be headmaster? All occupants of the castle at any given time? Perhaps the headmaster, since, IIRC, Dobby talks about DD telling him to call him a "barmy old codger" and when he warns Harry that Umbridge is coming he feels the need to punish himself. imamommy From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Sun Dec 19 22:06:41 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 14:06:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Parenting Harry (was: Re: I don't like him much) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041219220641.61285.qmail@web53103.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120163 --- mcmaxslb wrote: > > I think I've figured out you Snape lovers. You can't stand the fact that Harry is the hero of the Harry Potter series and that a hero has to be proactive, that the hero has to do things not just stand in a corner while a nasty,big nose SOB kicks him around. > Well after 5 novels the fact that Harry is the hero of the Harry Potter books is not going to change and if all of you just can't seem to deal with that then maybe you should simply stop reading the books. Juli Replies: I love Harry and I cry when he cries and laugh when he laughs, but do I think Snape is a SOB? ABSOLUTELY NOT. He'a just not your typical guy who loves Harry and treats him like a Hero, Snape isn't always nice, I think we all agree on that, but is he evil? no way. Does he hate Harry? I don't think so. Snape is just like so many characters, he may not be the lovable guy you always fall for, but eventually you start to like him, I know I have. I like Snape just the way he is, I'd hate it if all of a sudden he starts hugging Harry and Neville. And I'm not going to stop reading the books. Juli __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Sun Dec 19 22:10:54 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 14:10:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: Can Occlumency be taught ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041219221054.16197.qmail@web53107.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120165 > Alla wrote: > "This way of teaching smells TO ME of Voldemort's > way of teaching and I hope that occlumency can be > taught." > > Del replies : > Well, we still don't know WHO taught Occlumency to > Snape, if anyone did. It might very well have been > LV. > > And if Occlumency can be taught, my problem becomes > : why isn't it taught to everyone? Or at least to > everyone in the Order? But then, maybe it is? Juli: But why would Voldemort teach anybody how to lie to him? It just doesn't make much sense to me. I think Dumbledore taught Snape how to, for this is the only way he could spy for the Order in Voldemort's close circle. Dumbledore like Voldemort want to be able to read other people's minds to see who can they trust, if all of a sudden everyone learns occlumency how can you be sure who to trust? Juli From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Sun Dec 19 22:16:54 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 14:16:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: Does the Order know about the prophecy? / Re: Did Snape know WHY he must teach Harry Occlumency? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041219221654.26401.qmail@web53109.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120166 ...snip... > Alla wrote: > " I don't think we can doubt that Snape knows > EVERYTHING about Prophecy." > > Del replied : > I disagree. > 1. We know that DD didn't tell everything to Snape, > even things that concerned his job directly, like > the fact that Harry was dreaming of the corridor. Juli now: I think most of the Order members knew about the prophecy, including Snape, Arthur and Molly, Sirius and Lupin, otherwise they couldn't tell Harry seriously that he had to learn occlumency. After Christmas at 12GP and the snake vision, Dumbledore realized the connection worked both ways, and he asked Snape to teach him occlumency, Sirius must have known because he had a letter from DD and he wouldn't allow Harry to spend all this time with Snape if there wasn't a good reason. Del: > 2. I think DD acts with his subordinates in the very > same way he acts with Harry : on a need-to-know basis. > Strictly speaking, the Order members don't need to know > about the Prophecy, so DD might not have told them. Juli: I agree but not all the way, the Order MUST know a lot more than Harry, would any of them be willing to risk their life without knowing anything a lot? From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Sun Dec 19 22:24:11 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 14:24:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: A child is, by definition, WRONG In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041219222411.99264.qmail@web53108.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120167 > Geoff wrote: > "The whole affair is event-driven. Harry and Ron > wanted initially to tell Professor McGonagall; > events dictated against that." > > Del replied: > How so? McGonagall was just feet away from them when > they were in that cupboard. And not only her, but the > whole Hogwarts staff. The only thing that prevented > them from stepping outside that cupboard was themselves. Juli: I first thought that they didn't want to tell anything in front of Snape, I'm as always they were thinking that Snape was the bad guy so they didn't want to risk themselves. IMO of course. From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Sun Dec 19 22:27:28 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 14:27:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: Adults "failing" Harry (was: Themes in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041219222728.99839.qmail@web53108.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120168 ... previous posts snipped.... > Alla: > > I think that Lupinlore meant was Dumblecore CHOOSING > to be a leader in anti-Voldemort resistance in general, > not just dealing with one particular situation. Do you > think anybody FORCED him to be a Leader of OOP? > We definitely know that he CHOSE to be a Headmaster, > since he refused at some point to become Minister of > Magic. Juli: Dumbledore did choose to be Headmaster, but did he choose to be the leader of the OoP? I don't think so, he was the only one who could do it, the only one LV feared and the only one who knew so many people and who so many people trusted. He took the responsibility of the Order because nobody else could do it. Juli From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Sun Dec 19 22:37:55 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 14:37:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: Harry Potter for GROWN-UPS (was Parenting Harry (was: Re: I don't like him much) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041219223755.79263.qmail@web53110.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120169 > delwynmarch wrote: I try hard never to see things in > black and white (I have actually ruffled quite a few > feathers over the years with my tendency to introduce > some grey in the most obviously black-and-white > matters). > > mcmaxslb replied: > Well maybe that is just what is wrong, you introducing > gray into matters that are black-and-white. Such as you > defending both the Dursleys' abuse of Harry and Snape's > bullying of him. Will your next posts defended > Voldemort murdering James & Lily and then trying to kill > an fourteen month baby. Juli: What most people are saying is that Snape isn't all bad, he's a good guy (he saved Harry's life in PS/SS, and in PoA), there are two sides of everyone, not everyone is entirely good or entirely evil. Snape was a victim of bullies (MWPP), he doesn't bully Harry at least IMO because a bully is when someone takes on a weaker person and I don't think Snape sees Harry as weak. The Dursleys weren't the best foster parents, but they did OK, they fed Harry, clothed him, sent him to school, the basics, they didn't love him, they just tried to shake the magic out of him the best way they knew. I don't think anyone will start defending LV for killing James and Lily. Juli From imamommy at sbcglobal.net Mon Dec 20 03:28:40 2004 From: imamommy at sbcglobal.net (imamommy at sbcglobal.net) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 03:28:40 -0000 Subject: Parenting Harry (was: Re: I don't like him much) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120170 > Imamommy before: > > snip. > > (Big sigh!) I don't hate Snape. I have compassion for him and what > he may have suffered. But I am of the opinion that he is carrying a > personal vendetta against Harry too far. He sometimes makes a good > point, but I don't think his motivation is to help Harry in any way. > > Unless it's all an act. > > > > Alla: > > What I said many times. I love Snape's character as a whole, but > when I look at him within the story I partially love and partially > hate him. > > I have pity for him, I want him to be redeemed, I admire his anti- > Voldemort's efforts, but I don't SYMPATHISE with him one bit for > having irrational feelings of jealousy and hate towards a child. > > And of course it is only my opinion that he has those feelings > towards Harry. imamommy (in the spirit of open, free discussion with intelligent people whom I respect very much): It certainly started out that way. Snape seemed to hate Harry from Harry's first day at Hogwarts. But is it changing? See, I have this theory, part of my parenting philosophy and general attitude towards other people, that they will live up to your expectations. Snape has *expected* Harry to be an arrogant, lazy, spoiled little toerag. In many ways, that is *now* how Harry acts towards Snape. From their first encounter, IIRC, Snape cuts him down for being "famous," and blasts him for not knowing the right answers to questions on the first day of term. HE treats Harry like he's a cocky, no-good punk who's enjoying being the hot gossip, which, IMO, he has not. But after a few minutes, he gets Harry's dander up, and provokes him into cheeking him (and yes, I think he was cheeky). This pattern continues progressing through the books until, ultimately, Harry has become, at least in his interactions with Snape, much as Snape expected him to be. I do not think Snape's view of Harry is complete, but I think it now represents an actual facet of Harry's personality, and now we have become locked in a viscious cycle: Snape expects Harry to be a jerk, Harry acts like a jerk, so Snape expects Harry to act like a jerk... I think that both these characters have issues to resolve, and it will take something pretty big to heal the wounds they have inflicted on each other. I pity them both. imamommy From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Mon Dec 20 03:33:34 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 03:33:34 -0000 Subject: Snape as bully/teacher/protector/disciplinarian/nemesis/ally... Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120171 SNAPE, SNAPE, SNAPE! Wow. We sure are going off on Severus lately, aren't we? These threads are so intertwined *and* so spread out that I've given up on attempting to respond in any one thread, and I'm startin' afresh. WHO & WHAT IS SNAPE? Wouldn't JKR get a kick out of all this? Is Snape a bully or just a firm administrator? Is Snape a good teacher or a p*ss-poor teacher? Is Snape Harry's protector? Is he the only one who disciplines Harry in any sort of consistent manner? Or does he only discipline Harry because he wants to take every chance he can to bring Harry down a notch and make his life miserable? Has he managed to teach Harry anything? Whose fault is it if he hasn't? If he has managed to teach Harry something, has he managed to teach him all he could? Does Snape know the prophecy or does he not? WHO & WHAT ARE WE? My, my, my. So many questions. And so many of us looking for answers. Are we Snape lovers? Snape apologists? A bunch of bullies? [Yeah, right.] Snape bashers? Snape fence-sitters? Personally, I'm a Snape Fence-Sitter and proud of it! Down deep I want to think that DD's not a fool to trust Severus Snape and that Snape is acting fully of his own free will in the Order business, not *just* because he personally wants to bring Voldy down, but because he believes in The Cause. But as Renee so beautifully expressed in #120134, it's the DISCREPANCIES surrounding Snape which make him so fascinating. We know so little of his background, of his motivations for turning to the DEs, for turning to DD, for his nastiness, for his cruelty to Neville & Harry, for his watching out for Harry. We see it all, but we see it through Harry's lens ...or even if we see it more neutrally, it's still without all that background detail which could help us understand clearly. He is the proverbial mystery, wrapped in an enigma. So calling Snape "lovers" a bunch of bullies is really just too ridiculous to even consider. Snape's fascinating to many of us, period. I was never bullied, and I never bullied others. I don't love Snape, but I sure do love to talk about him and think about what makes him tick. No one can categorize us HPfGUers as simplistically as that and expect it to be accurate. SNAPE AND HIS TEACHING METHODS/WHAT DOES SNAPE KNOW? Del raised some points in #120177 about whether I jumped to too many conclusions about how much Snape knows. I'll concede that *if* she's right, much of my argument crumbles. For those who don't recall, my argument is this: 1) Snape is truly on the side of the good guys 2) Snape wants Voldy taken down **3) Snape understands that Harry is the only one with the chance of vanquishing Voldy** 4) Snape *should* logically therefore want Harry to be the best- prepared "weapon" he can be -? in charms, spells, dueling, potions, transfiguration, occlumency -- in every area possible 5) Snape *should* therefore want Harry to NOT just get by or learn enough to not fail, because he *should* understand that the future of the WW might well rest upon how well & how much Harry learns 6) In my view, Harry clearly isn't learning *well* from Snape 7) Snape *should* therefore swallow his pride/repress the rage/do whatever it takes, including ? horrors! ? evaluating his methods and alter his instruction tactics with Harry Now, if Del is right that Snape DOESN'T know about the prophecy and that Harry is WonderBoy, fine, I'd back off a bit from this argument. Of course, I don't think I'm wrong. :-) Although I could believe the argument that it could be dangerous for Snape to know too much of the prophecy. It would be dangerous ? to Snape and potentially to the Order if Voldy could get the info from him. If, however, Neri is right in his #120154 [please go read!!], about Molly, Arthur, Sirius & Lupin knowing about the prophecy and about Harry's importance, then it's hard to imagine Snape wouldn't also know. It could be because DD told him, or it could be because Snape's the one who overheard part of the prophecy in the first place. *However* he came to know, I agree with Neri that it does seem logical that he knows enough to know that Harry's "it," and so for now I will stand by my argument that Snape should have instructed Harry differently, both in Potions class and in Occlumency. Disclaimer 1: I believe Snape did try harder in Occlumency than he had in the past. Disclaimer 2: I believe Snape & Harry's relationship was so bitter & distorted by this point that there was little chance of success in Occl. without a lot of intervention from DD. So some of this is a moot point by book 5. But I just can't get over how someone who ostensibly understands how important Harry's role will be won't do whatever he can to make sure he's prepared. Yes, yes, yes ? I know Snape may see preparation as "toughening" Harry up. It also may include keeping him alive, something I think Snape has in mind when he punishes Harry for being out of bounds & flaunting school rules. But it also includes making sure the relationship isn't so sour that the kid won't listen and can't respect the teacher. Harry can be a prat, but he also *can* listen and *can* respect a teacher [McGonagall, Sprout, Flitwick, Lupin, Hagrid ? none seem to have big problems with Harry, do they?]. I can't but fault Snape for not seeing the bigger picture here. You've gotta be tough to face Voldy, but you've got to know your stuff, too, and Harry's not learning his stuff as well as he could, imo. His fault? Some, certainly. But Snape's too in my way of seeing things. Siriusly Snapey Susan From madettebeau at gmail.com Mon Dec 20 03:56:46 2004 From: madettebeau at gmail.com (madlysarcastic) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 03:56:46 -0000 Subject: Parenting Harry (was: Re: I don't like him much) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120172 imamommy said: > See, I have this theory, part of my parenting philosophy and general > attitude towards other people, that they will live up to your > expectations. Snape has *expected* Harry to be an arrogant, lazy, > spoiled little toerag. In many ways, that is *now* how Harry acts > towards Snape. From their first encounter, IIRC, Snape cuts him down > for being "famous," and blasts him for not knowing the right answers > to questions on the first day of term. HE treats Harry like he's a > cocky, no-good punk who's enjoying being the hot gossip, which, IMO, > he has not. But after a few minutes, he gets Harry's dander up, and > provokes him into cheeking him (and yes, I think he was cheeky). > This pattern continues progressing through the books until, > ultimately, Harry has become, at least in his interactions with > Snape, much as Snape expected him to be. > > I do not think Snape's view of Harry is complete, but I think it now > represents an actual facet of Harry's personality, and now we have > become locked in a viscious cycle: Snape expects Harry to be a jerk, > Harry acts like a jerk, so Snape expects Harry to act like a jerk... Maddy says: I think that's all probably true. But I think that idea can be extended to include Snape's behaviour and Harry's perception of Snape's behaviour. The first remarks from Snape against Harry seem to be a little out of line, to be sure. But, while I do believe that Snape is purposely unpleasant towards Harry, he *does*, as many here have said, do or try to do things for Harry's own good. (Whether this is because they are his duties as a teacher and an Order member, or from the goodness of his own -slightly bitter- heart, is up to debate). But I think once Harry noticed Snape's negativity towards him, and especially after he found out that Snape hated James, Harry ruled him off as a "bad guy", and an evil teacher all around. So everything Snape does, Harry interprets as something "out to get him", something purposely to Harry's disadvantage. And I think to some extent, Snape becomes more like this as the series progresses. The more we learn about him, the more unpleasant he becomes, at least, in Harry's eyes. After their first meeting, Harry expects Snape to be mean and unfair, and that's how Snape acts. (again, at least in Harry's eyes). More on Snape... I think, with the glaring exception of the bit of violence Snape showed towards Harry in the Pensieve scene in OotP, Snape's _actions_ have been pretty much efforts at trying to get Harry to obey rules for his own safety, or simply because they are the rules. Snape's various _comments_ however, are where he crosses the line, IMO. Whether it is remarks about Neville's lack of skill in Potions, Hermione's teeth, or Harry's father, Snape has a vicious tongue. His *actions* reflect reason and possibly honour, but it's the things Snape *says* that I think have given Harry and many of us readers the impression that he's bitter and mean. And while I certainly dislike Snape for being so mean spirited, I have to give him credit for his good actions that we have seen so far. And I think when all is said and done, what is *done* is more important than what has been said. So unless new evidence comes to light in books 6 and 7 about something horrible Snape does or has done, I have to think he's a good person, regardless of his mean comments to Harry and others. =) Maddy (who really should be studying instead of posting, and really likes Snape because he's such a great mystery...and enjoys snarky, sarcastic characters like him more than she previously realized.) From packsim at aol.com Mon Dec 20 03:54:18 2004 From: packsim at aol.com (packsim at aol.com) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 22:54:18 EST Subject: Bullying Was Re: [HPforGrownups] Digest Number 5557 Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120173 > mcmaxslb wrote earlier: And I think I now have a handle on all you Snape lovers, you were > in all probably bullies just like Snape and you enjoy seeing Harry > being bullied. Takes you back to your school days when you were > hurting people doesn't it? > > > julii17 at a : wrote > mcmaxslb, may I respectfully ask you not to insult others.... > > mcmaxslb replied: > I was just making an observation it was not in any way meant as an > insult.OK I'll take back the part about all Snape lovers being > bullies. However it has touched a nerve with a allot of people and > maybe they need to look at why it did. With all due respect, mcmaxslb, I might point out that your response is similiar to the "Have you beaten your wife recently?" If I say "no", then the response is: "So you haven't beaten her for a while?" If I get angry and say: "I've never hit her!" then the response would be: "Why are you so defensive about it? What are you hiding?" To say it touches a nerve for "allot of people" is false. I could point out that people who make false accusations and try to stir up trouble routinely torture small kneazle kittens. If you deny it, it obviously touched a nerve. Totally false reasoning. I find it telling that you not only do not like Snape, you seem to bear a grudge against anyone who does. Thank you for taking back the "All Snape Lovers are bullies" remark... sort of. It seems almost a mirror of the prejudices in the WW. The sort of "All Mudbloods should be killed" spiel so favored by Death Eaters. Hope that doesn't touch a nerve. ~Lisa [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From elsyee_h at yahoo.com Mon Dec 20 04:15:26 2004 From: elsyee_h at yahoo.com (Tammy) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 04:15:26 -0000 Subject: Naked house elves/questions In-Reply-To: <20041220014110.DDN25543.mta10.adelphia.net@steveupstairs> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120174 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > > >Jeanette: > > Where do house elves get their clothes? If no one can give a > >house elf clothes I guess they must make their own. Are their > >families allowed to give them the cloth? Do they have to scavenge > >discarded rags? > > Steve here: > I've always thought that the elves scrounged their clothes from > scraps, maybe passed down from generation to generation. After all, a badly > clothed house elf is still better than a naked one. Tammy: Is it possible that house elves are allowed to make their own clothing from scraps of fabric, or towels (such as the Hogwarts towels?)? Obviously the Malfoys weren't very nice, so Dobby had little to choose from. -Tammy From ms-tamany at rcn.com Mon Dec 20 04:25:16 2004 From: ms-tamany at rcn.com (Tammy Rizzo) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 23:25:16 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Naked house elves/questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120175 Hi, Tammy! It's Tammy. No, no, that other Tammy. Yeah. :-) I think you've probably got it just about right about house elves being allowed to use scraps of fabric, or towels, or the like, to fashion coverings for themselves. I think it's just that simple. There are always old sheets or things that need to be replaced -- why can't the elves have them? I can almost picture the house-elf fashionistas trying out the drape and design of the various bath and bed linens available! ;-) *** Tammy Rizzo HYPERLINK "mailto:ms-tamany at rcn.com"ms-tamany at rcn.com Help me earn a new laptop! Use this link! HYPERLINK "http://www.ezlaptop.com/index.php?ref=8574"http://www.ezlaptop.com/index.ph p?ref=8574 _____ From: Tammy [mailto:elsyee_h at yahoo.com] Sent: Sunday, December 19, 2004 11:15 PM To: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Naked house elves/questions Is it possible that house elves are allowed to make their own clothing from scraps of fabric, or towels (such as the Hogwarts towels?)? Obviously the Malfoys weren't very nice, so Dobby had little to choose from. -Tammy -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.296 / Virus Database: 265.5.4 - Release Date: 12/15/2004 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From hpfgu.elves at gmail.com Mon Dec 20 04:46:42 2004 From: hpfgu.elves at gmail.com (hpfgu_elves) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 04:46:42 -0000 Subject: ADMIN: Rudeness and Insults, again Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120176 Hello, everyone-- Seems time to blow the dust off of this admin and give it another run; we realize it's a bit late in the day for it, but we tried contacting people offlist first. It would appear that some of those people have yet to see the message they received from the elves, so please check your inboxes. >From the HBF: "We welcome debate, but do not attack or insult other list members." Interpretations and opinions of canon are as varied as our membership; debating and discussing these interpretations and sharing opinions are the reasons for this group's existence. As adults, we expect everyone here to accept that we are all entitled to our opinions, and we expect that people should be able to disagree with one another without being snide or insulting. Please keep your comments and critiques focused to the merits of the argument. Do not attack or insult other list members. If you find yourself losing your temper, don't hit 'Send'. Read your response later and find a way to make your point without attacking others. Please keep it civil. We reserve the right to pull offending threads and to put repeat offenders back on moderated status. Also, thanks to all list members who've made the points listed above; it's very appreciated! Kelley, for the Admin Team From foxmoth at qnet.com Mon Dec 20 05:25:53 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 05:25:53 -0000 Subject: You're in the Army, now. wasFalse Alarm? Was:Re: Adults "failing" Harry (in tP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120177 Neri: > > So Sirius and Lupin know that it is something LV didn't have last time, and they know more than that, which is the part that Molly stops them from telling, and she implies that anybody who is inducted into the Order knows this part. And why is it Molly, of all the Order members, who objects here so emotionally? She's not the only one who cares about security breaches, but she is the one who cares about Harry's innocence.< Pippin: What the Order's been told, I imagine, is what Voldemort was allowed to think--that the prophecy would tell him how to destroy Harry. Molly would naturally not want Harry to be told that. But Dumbledore had a much better reason than Molly for not wanting Harry to be told this -- he knew it wasn't true. Sirius and Lupin, I believe, also knew better -- I think James told Sirius about the prophecy and he, much later, told Lupin. It's significant that the glance goes between Sirius and Lupin and not between the others at the table. Those two know something they think is secret.But Sirius and Lupin couldn't tell Harry what they actually knew because they weren't supposed to know it. Pippin From bob.oliver at cox.net Mon Dec 20 05:28:57 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 05:28:57 -0000 Subject: Not liking Harry's character (was Parenting Harry ) In-Reply-To: <20041219220641.61285.qmail@web53103.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120178 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Juli wrote: > > > --- mcmaxslb wrote: > > >> > > Well after 5 novels the fact that Harry is the hero > of the Harry Potter books is not going to change and > if all of you just can't seem to deal with that then > maybe you should simply stop reading the books. > Hmmm. Well, at the risk of making myself a lightning rod, I think I'm going to have to partially agree with this one. Now, let me explain what I mean by that. I think that there are a lot of people, particularly a lot of adults, who really aren't interested in the character of Harry. Now, there isn't anything wrong with that at all. However, it does illustrate a fascinating phenomenon. Many people (I'm not one of them, I hasten to add) don't care for Harry, or the other members of the trio, because they find them to be "standard." That is, "standard orphan Hero grows up to save the world." The adult characters, on the other hand, are very unusual in the setting of "children's" fantasy in the depth of their characterization. I think a lot of adults (and perhaps kids too for all I know) really sympathize strongly with one or the other of the adults. We can't help but put ourselves in their shoes and speculate as to what makes them tick. The more possible explanations, the more interesting this can be -- thus the fascination with Snape. Now, I have to admit that I rather agree, just personally, that I don't understand why anyone would be interested in Snape or find him likeable or amusing in any way. His remarks are hurtful and I have never understood it when people find hurtful remarks amusing or argue that people who make them are "good." By definition, in my opinion, people who make remarks of the type Snape makes are not good people. However, I don't think people who like Snape are bullies. I find it inexplicable, but that doesn't mean much. There are a lot of things I don't understand. Nevertheless, although I can't fathom why, the fact remains that there are plenty of people who are fascinated by, and even identify with, Snape. There are also people who identify strongly with McGonagall, Lupin, Sirius, and Dumbledore. It is one of the favorite exercises of the fandom. And that is the right of every reader. JKR can write whatever she wants. Readers can react any way they want. That's the way it works. However, it is true that JKR has made it clear that the books are very much about Harry. There is absolutely nothing wrong with being fascinated by other characters. However, if one makes the mistake of wanting "X" to become the hero or heroes of the epic, or for their story to move to center stage and overshadow Harry's, well... that's likely to be a recipe for severe disappointment. And there will be a lot of very disappointed people when all is said and done, because there just isn't room enough and time to tell the stories even of Ron and Hermione fully, much less Neville or Luna, much less any of the adults. I don't say that as any sort of judgment about what people should or should not be interested in, but just as my reading of JKR's repeated remarks about what interests her and what the epic is about. Lupinlore From bob.oliver at cox.net Mon Dec 20 06:00:14 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 06:00:14 -0000 Subject: Snape as bully/teacher/protector/disciplinarian/nemesis/ally... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120179 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > > > SNAPE AND HIS TEACHING METHODS/WHAT DOES SNAPE KNOW? > > Del raised some points in #120177 about whether I jumped to too many > conclusions about how much Snape knows. I'll concede that *if* > she's right, much of my argument crumbles. For those who don't > recall, my argument is this: > > 1) Snape is truly on the side of the good guys > 2) Snape wants Voldy taken down > **3) Snape understands that Harry is the only one with the chance of > vanquishing Voldy** > 4) Snape *should* logically therefore want Harry to be the best- > prepared "weapon" he can be -? in charms, spells, dueling, potions, > transfiguration, occlumency -- in every area possible > 5) Snape *should* therefore want Harry to NOT just get by or learn > enough to not fail, because he *should* understand that the future > of the WW might well rest upon how well & how much Harry learns > 6) In my view, Harry clearly isn't learning *well* from Snape > 7) Snape *should* therefore swallow his pride/repress the rage/do > whatever it takes, including ? horrors! ? evaluating his methods and > alter his instruction tactics with Harry > > > Now, if Del is right that Snape DOESN'T know about the prophecy and > that Harry is WonderBoy, fine, I'd back off a bit from this > argument. > > Of course, I don't think I'm wrong. :-) Although I could believe > the argument that it could be dangerous for Snape to know too much > of the prophecy. It would be dangerous ? to Snape and potentially > to the Order if Voldy could get the info from him. > > If, however, Neri is right in his #120154 [please go read!!], about > Molly, Arthur, Sirius & Lupin knowing about the prophecy and about > Harry's importance, then it's hard to imagine Snape wouldn't also > know. It could be because DD told him, or it could be because > Snape's the one who overheard part of the prophecy in the first > place. *However* he came to know, I agree with Neri that it does > seem logical that he knows enough to know that Harry's "it," and so > for now I will stand by my argument that Snape should have > instructed Harry differently, both in Potions class and in > Occlumency. > > Disclaimer 1: I believe Snape did try harder in Occlumency than he > had in the past. Disclaimer 2: I believe Snape & Harry's > relationship was so bitter & distorted by this point that there was > little chance of success in Occl. without a lot of intervention from > DD. So some of this is a moot point by book 5. > > But I just can't get over how someone who ostensibly understands how > important Harry's role will be won't do whatever he can to make sure > he's prepared. Yes, yes, yes ? I know Snape may see preparation > as "toughening" Harry up. It also may include keeping him alive, > something I think Snape has in mind when he punishes Harry for being > out of bounds & flaunting school rules. But it also includes making > sure the relationship isn't so sour that the kid won't listen and > can't respect the teacher. Harry can be a prat, but he also *can* > listen and *can* respect a teacher [McGonagall, Sprout, Flitwick, > Lupin, Hagrid ? none seem to have big problems with Harry, do > they?]. > > I can't but fault Snape for not seeing the bigger picture here. > > You've gotta be tough to face Voldy, but you've got to know your > stuff, too, and Harry's not learning his stuff as well as he could, > imo. His fault? Some, certainly. But Snape's too in my way of > seeing things. > > Siriusly Snapey Susan I agree with you on just about every point, Susan. However, I would go in a *slightly* different direction. I think you are correct that Snape's methods were hopeless. However, I don't think it would be possible for him to teach Harry any other way. He is simply too damaged. Where I think Snape *can* most certainly be faulted is in not owning up to the fact of his deficiency. He is an adult and should be wise enough to know what his own weaknesses are. If he can't teach Harry effectively, he should own up to that, very vigorously if need be. You don't ask alcoholics to tend bar, and that is what Snape teaching Harry amounts to. Perhaps Snape did try to explain this to DD, but if so we have no evidence of it. Which gets us back to Dumbledore, the other member of this happy disfunctional family. I don't think DD is a fool for trusting Snape - although I tend to think Snape's motives are almost purely selfish. I don't think the man has a noble particle in his makeup. Nevertheless, I think Snape truly is on the side of DD and the Order. Where I think DD is a fool is in misjudging the depths of Snape's emotionally crippled nature. DD tends, I strongly suspect, to put positive spins on things. He probably managed to convince himself that *surely* Snape could put things aside now that he saw the ox was in the ditch, so to speak. I think where Snape is at fault, as I said above, is in not owning up to the fact, while there was still time to do something else, that he *just couldn't do it.* Lupinlore From hedwigstalons at yahoo.com Mon Dec 20 07:50:50 2004 From: hedwigstalons at yahoo.com (hedwigstalons) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 07:50:50 -0000 Subject: Harry Potter for GROWN-UPS Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120180 Um, hi, I'm not a list-Elf or anything, but this post seems to have gone WAY OT. It needs to be conducted on the OT list, or privately. Just my two knuts. From mwsteigers at yahoo.com Mon Dec 20 06:31:39 2004 From: mwsteigers at yahoo.com (mwsteigers) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 06:31:39 -0000 Subject: Trelawny has not lost ALL her marbles... Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120181 I am new to this board, and I am sure that this topic has been discussed before... but nonetheless I wish to know what you all think. I believe Trelawny's predictions will have a major impact on the storyline of the books to come. I'm not referencing the two prophecies vouched for by Dumbledore, but the small ones. She saw the Grim in his tea cup signifying death, and Sirius (a big black dog like a Grim) wound up buying the farm. I believe JK is inserting clues into future using this lovable, yet lamentable character. Maybe this idea is just obvious to you all, but I'm pretty proud of myself. Marc From kcawte at ntlworld.com Mon Dec 20 10:06:05 2004 From: kcawte at ntlworld.com (slytherinspirit) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 10:06:05 -0000 Subject: Harry Potter for GROWN-UPS In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120182 > Mcmaxslb wrote: > > Right and wrong are not as subjective as you like to think. > > > > Good people do not do evil things. I too know abuse victoms and they > have never hurt anyone. > K Right and wrong are very subjective and good people frequently do evil things, either as an aberration or 'for the greater good'. For example (and I swear I'll bring this back to the books by the end of the paragraph, List Elves) - I think most of us could agree that the deliberate killing of large numbers of civilians is wrong, but probably only a minority of people would consider the pilots who dropped atom bombs on Hiroshima & Nagasaki to be evil. Right and wrong depend greatly on context and your personal beliefs. Personally I think burning someone at the stake for witchcraft is evil - the WW certainly seems to use it as an argument for keeping their world hidden from muggles - yet leading theologians at the time would have explained it not simply as being a 'necessary evil' (as with my earlier real world example) but as actually being a *good* thing to do as it both protected others and was a means of saving the witch in question's soul. Since you are so convinced that right and wrong are utterly immutable, tell me how Harry is meant to defeat Voldemort - I'm assuming since you think Snape's verbal abuse of Harry is evil that you would consider killing someone to be evil as well. And if we give Harry a pass on killing Voldemort (which we can't because killing is evil and good people never do evil deeds ergo Harry must be evil if he kills Voldemort), how is he supposed to go about it? AK is after all illegal. JKR very rarely writes situations that are black and white. Snape is a deeply flawed individual but I certainly wouldn't say that he is evil, merely that he is capable of evil acts, but so are most of the main characters. Sirius is another example, personally I think he had a rough deal over his life with more than his share of bad stuff being thrown his way - but I'm sure people could make a good argument for this being bad karma on his part since he's certainly not a plaster saint. Harry is our 'hero' but breaks rules with an abandon whcih almost seems to justify Snape's belief that Harry thinks he is 'above the law' (so to speak) because of who he is. Ron alters between being a loyal and heroic sidekick on the one hand and a brat who I could cheerfully dropkick of a cliff on the other. Hermione's heart is clearly n the right place but she comes across as being arrogant and shows a blatant disregard for the feelings and opinions of anyone who disagrees with her - even when they happen to be the same people she is allegedly trying to help. For me Remus is one of the least flawed and even he has a bad habit of standing by and watching when he should be standing up for what he believes is right. And don't even get me started on Dumbledore - frankly if he's an example of the people who're going to be in charge if the 'good guys' win then I'm not sure I wouldn't prefer Voldemort. None of this is to say that I dislike these characters - although if I met them in real life I suspect I'd have to strongly resist the urge to throw heavy objects at some of them. The only character I actively dislike at the moment is Draco - and that's because he seems to be such a 2D panto villain that it's not funny. And as for the deaths of the Potters - I have to say it's one of the few sane things I've seen Voldemort do, although while the plan itself was reasonably sound he does lose points on technical merit for getting his body killed. Had he sent his trusted lieutenants to kill them instead of doing it himself that would havebeen better but unfortunately (for him) he doesn't seem to have *trusted* lieutenants. > > > Mcmaxslb wrote: > "And if you can't handle someone challenging you instead of agreeing > then you are going to be the unhappy one, deal with it." > K Pot meet kettle. You weren't challenging her or anyone else - you were simply issuing a blanket condemnation of anyone who holds a different viewpoint to you on the subject of Snape. If your reaction to anyone who doesn't agree with you is going to be to imply that they are somehow morally inferior to you I suspect it's you that's going to be unhappy around here - since most of the rest of the group would probably be more upset if everyone *did* agree with them (after all what would happen to all the interesting discussions if we ever found something where we all thought alike?). K From eloiseherisson at aol.com Mon Dec 20 10:19:24 2004 From: eloiseherisson at aol.com (eloise_herisson) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 10:19:24 -0000 Subject: One last try (re: Parenting Harry (was: Re: I don't like him much)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120183 Oh dear. How can such hostilities break out over what I am supposed to have said about the nature of a character in a fictional series? It's even more unenecessary when I have repeatedly tried to make clear that my primary point had nothing to do with the nature of character himself let alone my approbation or disapprobation of him, but of a function he performs. Now as it happens, I *agree* with just about everything that several of the more recent posters (who have engaged in reasonable dialogue) on this thread have said. This in particular seems to be a sticking point where what I'm saying gets countered by an argument against what I'm *not* saying: wrote: > > > However, the argument I was making was that Snape is the only one > > who *consistentely* disciplines Harry and ties to curb his rule > > breaking tendencies and that even Lupin, who cares deeply for Harry > > > and does attempt to exercise some control over him, ultimately > > fails in this role. How does Lupin's giving the Map back to Harry > > out of nostalgia contradict that? imamommy: >Look, IMO only, I think that most (not all!)of the Trio's >rulebreaking is, in their minds at least, for a greater good. Harry >usually has good reasons for breaking rules. Maybe it's because I >had clueless parents and had to sort of chart my own course, but >Harry's independent tendencies strike a chord for me. I think Lupin >identifies with Harry, and knows that there will be good uses for the >map in the future. I'm not sure what I can say to that other than to re-read the quote. *of course* the trio are rule-breaking for good reason. As someone wrote yesterday, there's even reason to think that JKR might be suggesting that rule breaking for good reason is sometimes the right thing to do. *But* Lupin was not at that point having the function (either in the fictional world, or as a literary device) of being the upholder of the rules that Harry breaks. Is there anything controversial in that statement that I've missed? Is it clear where I'm coming from? (I'm not addressing imamommy now.) I'm not commenting on the validity of the rules, the necessity sometime to break them, the style of enforcing them, the virtue of the characters, just on there being a role of being the rule-upholder. Above all, I am not commenting on, approving of or disapproving of Snape's actions. Now I am trying very hard (as I have all along) and bearing in mind Lupinlore's latest exhortations to make myself very clear. I have said that Snape performs a particular function in the text, one which I described as being the unpalatable side of parenting, being the Enforcer, if you like. (Just as a side note, although I defined this as a parenting role, it doesn't then necessitate that the role will be performed well.) Take Snape out of the text, as some would clearly like to do, and tell me who there is as a constant throughout the series, performing that function? Rule breaking is a constant theme, is it not? Harry frequently flouts the rules, goes for midnight wanders, sneeks out of the castle, etc., etc.. Now if there is no *consequence* for breaking the rules, they might as well not be there. Rule-breaking becomes a complete dud as a theme in the series. Where is the excitement, the frisson of fear, if when Harry wanders the corridors under his Invisibility Cloak, the worst that happens is that he'll have a nice little chat with Dumbledore or that McGonagall will be stern with him and give him a reasonable punishment? Now yes, there is Filch, but he seems to have a function as Snape's lacky; Snape seems to be the teacher to whom he goes with troublemakers. What I am saying is that Harry pushes boundaries and those boundaries are marked, are personified, if you like, by Snape more than any other character. Snape is the most serious immediate consequence of any discovered rule-breaking. When Harry wanders the corridors with the Map, it is Snape for whom he is on the look out. Now yes, others do step in sometimes. Lupin mentors him, reasons with him, but still has no long term effect in that Harry still goes to Hogsmeade, still ends up going to the Shrieking Shack, etc.. McGonagall reminds him of the rules, even gives him detention in PS/SS, but is strangely uninvolved as the head of his house. And then there's Umbridge, who fortunately is not a long term fixture in the series. With her the stakes for rule-breaking are raised even higher and I think that's the point. For the books to work, it's not good enough that Harry happily trolls along at school, finding out all the information he needs until he's in the position for an exciting denouement, he has to overcome real obstacles with real (but lesser than Voldemortesque) consequences. Harry is at school, so many of the obstacles he has to overcome are rules. These aren't exciting unless the effects of breaking them have serious personal consequences. That's why having the enforcers be so unsympathetic is so effective. Now before anyone deduces from all this that I'm saying that bullying and child abuse is OK, I'm not. I'm observing that JKR has placed these two characters in the text and trying to explain why they might be there, what function they might perform and why making them so mean to Harry is an effective plot device. ~Eloise From mhbobbin at yahoo.com Mon Dec 20 11:21:00 2004 From: mhbobbin at yahoo.com (mhbobbin) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 11:21:00 -0000 Subject: Trelawny has not lost ALL her marbles... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120184 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mwsteigers" wrote: > > > I am new to this board, and I am sure that this topic has been > discussed before... but nonetheless I wish to know what you all > think. I believe Trelawny's predictions will have a major impact on > the storyline of the books to come. I'm not referencing the two > prophecies vouched for by Dumbledore, but the small ones. She saw > the Grim in his tea cup signifying death, and Sirius (a big black > dog like a Grim) wound up buying the farm. I believe JK is > inserting clues into future using this lovable, yet lamentable > character. Maybe this idea is just obvious to you all, but I'm > pretty proud of myself. > Marc mhbobbin replies: I'm with you. I think JKR works overtime to convince us that Trelawney is a fraud. In posts from the July-August period, there was considerable discussion on this. Someone examined all of Trelawney's predictions, and came up with a 50-50 ratio for accuracy. Of course, some outcomes are still to be determined. I try to focus on what Trelawney actually sees, not what she says she sees. I'm particularly interested in that prediction in OOTP where she sees danger (yet again) for Harry in everything, including when he's eating his porridge. That one raised my eyebrows, along with Harry's prediction to the OWLS Examiner that she would meet a dark, soggy stranger. (Wormtail anyone?) mhbobbin From bob.oliver at cox.net Mon Dec 20 12:49:08 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 12:49:08 -0000 Subject: You're in the Army, now. wasFalse Alarm? Was:Re: Adults "failing" Harry (in tP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120185 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > > > Pippin: > What the Order's been told, I imagine, is what Voldemort was > allowed to think--that the prophecy would tell him how to destroy > Harry. Molly would naturally not want Harry to be told that. But > Dumbledore had a much better reason than Molly for not wanting > Harry to be told this -- he knew it wasn't true. > Interesting. Can you quote any canon to support this, Pippin? I'm not saying you're wrong, but I don't recall this in OOTP. I don't recall anyone ever saying WHAT Voldie thought the prophecy was. Lupinlore From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Mon Dec 20 13:09:27 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 13:09:27 -0000 Subject: OKAY, let's all just take a chill pill In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120186 Lupinlore wrote: "1) There is a difference between fiction and real life;" Del replies: Yep. Good thing too : there are enough powerful wackos out there, I'm sure GLAD there isn't also an evil powerful wizard out to kill us all Muggles! I mean, he doesn't REALLY exist, does he? Oh, and I'm also glad my future doesn't depend on the choices of one single boy ;-) Lupinlore wrote: "2) Those who find certain abusive/evil/etc. characters interesting in fiction are in no way advocating or defending their actions and would not be allies of them in RL. (I, for example, find Sauron in LOTR a fascinating figure, but I wouldn't want to play cards with him.)" Del replies: In RL, the Dursleys would highly irritate and shock me, and I wouldn't take their treatment of Harry lightly. In RL, I probably wouldn't approach Snape within a 100 feet. In RL, Sirius would probably make me horribly edgy and nervous because of his moodiness and unpredictability. On the other hand, I might also develop a desire to help him heal emotionally. In RL, I couldn't care less about Ron. In RL, I would probably want to slap Hermione half the time, and worship her the other half of the time. And so on. But the Potterverse is not the RL. Lupinlore wrote: "ON THE OTHER HAND: 1) There ARE real issues with some of the themes brought up in the HP books, in OOTP in particular, where there sometimes seems to be a subtle and not so subtle message that abuse is OK in a good cause and that emotional health is not important as long as the job gets done;" Del replies : Agreed. I happen to be particularly sensitive to mental and emotional health problems, and I'm often appalled at the level of insensitivity many Potterverse characters show for people going through such problems, including themselves and their friends. Expecting such people as Sirius and Snape, for example, who have clearly *demonstrated* that they just can NOT get over their problems on their own, to just pick themselves up and snap out of their negative reasonings and reactions, is, to put it very mildly, silly. I can cut a lot of slack to DD, but forcing Snape to teach Harry Occlumency was completely stupid IMO, and so was expecting Sirius to stay put and inactive. Lupinlore wrote: "2) Those who find these themes disturbing, problematic, and pernicious are not being silly, deluded, hysterical, over-the-top, or ignorant of the definition of fiction." Del replies: Agreed. Though I'm the first to admit that I might not be considerate enough of other people's feelings sometimes. Lupinlore wrote: "I personally think a lot of this arises from the fact that JKR assumes we know what she means when in fact what she means is often very unclear" Del replies: In fact, I'm not even sure we should assume that JKR assumes we know what she means. She IS the Mistress of Mislead after all. Del From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Mon Dec 20 13:48:24 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 13:48:24 -0000 Subject: Adults "failing" Harry (was: Themes in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120187 Lupinlore wrote: " Once Dumbledore took it upon himself to make these profound decisions, the responsibility for their outcome adhered to him. Whether he wanted to make these decisions or not is of no consequence whatsoever with regard to the blame that he bears." Del replies: I'm of two minds on that one. On one hand, I agree with you. DD made choices, he's got to live up to them. On the other hand, I am ready to cut him some slack on some of his decisions because I feel he really did the best he could under the circumstances and it's really not his fault if some things turned out pretty badly : he didn't mean them too. For example, sure he knew that the Dursleys wouldn't be the most loving foster parents there could be, but I'm sure he didn't anticipate them being so loveless and abusive. I still don't understand why he didn't keep a check on them and step in when things got bad, but I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. Lupinlore wrote : "Dumbledore made the decisions, Dumbledore must bear the blame for the consequences. That may not be perfectly fair, it may not be perfectly reasonable, but it is utterly true and utterly necessary. No one can take it upon themselves to make such profound decisions about another person's life without bearing the responsibility for the outcome of their decisions. " Del replies: I disagree. DD *is* responsible for much, of course he is. And he knows that too. But he's definitely not responsible for what other people do IMO. He's responsible for putting Harry with the Dursleys, but not for the way the Dursleys treated him (or just a bit maybe). He's mostly responsible for Harry missing the bigger picture in OoP, but not for Harry's decision to go to the DoM. DD is responsible for the way he took his decisions, but not for the unpredictable consequences of those decisions. If he is, then James and Lily are also entirely responsible for Harry being raised by anyone but them, and Harry is entirely responsible for Cedric's and Sirius's deaths. I'm not saying that nothing is DD's fault. But I am saying that many things are not his *fault*, even though they are the unpredictable consequences of his decisions. He can't avoid dealing with those consequences, but he shouldn't be blamed for making the decisions in the first place IMO. The funny thing is, I'm not so sure we disagree. I have a nagging feeling that we are talking past each other. I'm wondering if this isn't just another case of us not using the same words in exactly the same way, or not translating our concepts the same way. Do you get the same feeling? Del From severelysigune at yahoo.co.uk Mon Dec 20 13:50:21 2004 From: severelysigune at yahoo.co.uk (severelysigune) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 13:50:21 -0000 Subject: Not liking Harry's character (was Parenting Harry ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120188 mcmaxslb wrote: > > > Well after 5 novels the fact that Harry is the hero > > of the Harry Potter books is not going to change and > > if all of you just can't seem to deal with that then > > maybe you should simply stop reading the books. > > Lupinlore wrote: Sigune delurks, looking paler than usual after reading the recent string of insults against Snape fans, and clears her throat: I suppose everyone reads books in their own way, and we all like different bits of them. I am very happy for those people who are most interested in the main characters of every novel they read - at least they can be more or less sure their favourites will make it till the end of the book. I can't explain why, but more often than not when I read books (not just HP) I find that I am more fascinated by secondary characters. Most of the time they die halfway through the novel and leave me rather sad and looking out for a new favourite. I think part of the magic of secondary characters - and Snape is a wonderful example - is that we simply do not know as much about them as we know about the main characters, but just enough to set us speculating. A lot is left to the reader's imagination, and you can fill in the gaps for yourself. That is how I (I can't speak for other people) get drawn into a narrative. As for Snape, I personally hope JKR is never going to reveal his entire story (actually I think he's just not important enough for her to do so), so that the merry speculation can continue into infinity. Make no mistake, I *like* reading about Harry, Ron and Hermione, and I want to know how their story goes; but as far as *fascination* goes, that lies with people like Snape and Dumbledore. So, as I see it, it's not a matter of any 'inability to deal with the fact that Harry is the main character' that makes me interested in Snape. It's just that I know too much about Harry to set my imagination going. And I have always been fascinated by the motivations people have for doing unspeakable things like joining the Death Eaters, just because I can't understand why anyone would. An interest in other people's motivations - I add this for safety's sake, in view of recent discussions - does *not* imply agreement with their deeds. By the way: my fascination for Snape only really started when I read the 'Worst Memory' chapter. I became a Snape fan because I *have been* bullied, not because I ever bullied anyone. Snape is interesting because of his inability to deal with his issues, and his character addresses matters that people who have been through similar experiences have to deal with - though hopefully in a better, more mature way than what he makes of it. Sorry. Just had to say my bit on that topic - as mcmaxslb would say, 'it touched a nerve'. Yours severely, Sigune From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Mon Dec 20 14:02:33 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 14:02:33 -0000 Subject: You're in the Army, now. wasFalse Alarm? Was:Re: Adults "failing" Harry (in tP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120189 Neri wrote: "As I say, it is not 100% certain, but I'd say it is at least 95% certain that they know that there's a prophecy in the DoM, that only Harry and Voldy can retrieve it, and that it says only Harry can vanquish Voldy. It is also obvious DD told them very specifically not to tell Harry. And it would be very strange if Sirius, Lupin, Arthur and Molly know this, but Snape doesn't." Del replies: But it's those 5% that bother me, because they leave too much wiggle room for DD to have played another one of his tricks. Even if DD told the Order about the existence of the Prophecy, I really don't think he told all the members of the Order what the Prophecy says, because of one obvious reason : it's way too dangerous. If LV gets a hold of one of the members, he could get the answer to his quest without having to reveal himself. So I'm pretty sure that DD must have ommitted some part of the truth. But just how much, we don't know. Del From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Mon Dec 20 14:03:40 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 06:03:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Parenting Harry (was: Re: I don't like him much) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041220140340.45978.qmail@web53106.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120190 -- imamommy at sbcglobal.net wrote: > > But I don't see it as "demented mother hen," because I don't think > Snape's motivation is to teach or protect Harry. I think it is to > punish him and keep him downtrodden. I don't. If his only motive was to keep him downtrodden, then I think Snape would be enjoying himself a lot more. > Firstly, why didn't Snape turn Harry over to McGonagall? Snape > didn't need to be involved in punishing him (and I'm sure MM would > have done an adequate job, even in his eyes). I think Snape was > issuing vengeance, not discipline. Well, it was a Slytherin who was attacked with mud by an invisible Harry in Hogsmeade, and it was Snape that Draco ran to (whimpering all the way, we may be sure) so it's not like Snape has no business at all in the matter. What Snape wants to find out here is how Harry got into Hogsmeade in the first place as he probably didn't just walk out the front doors. Snape suspects that Lupin is in cahoots with Sirius Black to deliver the last of the Potters to him. He's looking for some proof that Lupin has made some suggestions to Harry about hidden passages and the like. The map, and those nicknames which he remembers from his own student days, seems like a perfect "smoking gun" as who else but Lupin could have given it to Harry? ("did he get it from the manufacturers?") Of course Lupin talks his way out of it and gets himself and Harry out the door ASAP. In retrospect, Snape should have flooed Dumbledore rather than Lupin but hindsight is 20-20 and Snape makes the same mistake at the Shrieking Shack at the end of the book. He's got something to prove to Dumbledore and he's going to prove it no matter what. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The all-new My Yahoo! - What will yours do? http://my.yahoo.com From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Mon Dec 20 14:17:03 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 14:17:03 -0000 Subject: Not liking Harry's character In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120191 Sigune wrote: "So, as I see it, it's not a matter of any 'inability to deal with the fact that Harry is the main character' that makes me interested in Snape. It's just that I know too much about Harry to set my imagination going. And I have always been fascinated by the motivations people have for doing unspeakable things like joining the Death Eaters, just because I can't understand why anyone would." Del replies: Oooh! Yes, that's it! Thanks Sigune, you've helped me put a word on the reason why I'm not a huge fan of Harry on-board : because he's, well, boring to talk about. We *know* him, so there isn't much to talk about, apart from what he might do in the future. But all the other characters are much more interesting to talk about as far as *I* am concerned, precisely because we don't know them, we're not in their heads, we don't know what makes them act all the time. To make a very self-centered analogy : I find myself utterly boring, but I find many people around me interesting. I could write anyone else's biography and put quite some passion into it, but I was never able to write my own journal because I find my own life incredibly boring, even though it's not that boring when looked at objectively. But because it's my own life, I am in my own head, I know why I do things, so it just doesn't trigger my interest nor my imagination. It's the same with Harry : I know too 'intimately' how he functions, so I don't care much about discussing him, even though I truly enjoy reading about his life. Del From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Mon Dec 20 14:34:49 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 14:34:49 -0000 Subject: Can Occlumency be taught ? In-Reply-To: <20041219221054.16197.qmail@web53107.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120192 Juli asked: " But why would Voldemort teach anybody how to lie to him?" Del replies: To use him as a spy on DD, for example. I'm not saying that's what happened, it's just a possibility. Juli wrote: " Dumbledore like Voldemort want to be able to read other people's minds to see who can they trust, if all of a sudden everyone learns occlumency how can you be sure who to trust?" Del replies: Which begs the question : was Peter Pettigrew an Occlumens? If yes, who taught him? If not, how could he fool DD for an entire year? Similarly : was Sirius an Occlumens? If not, how come DD didn't know Sirius wasn't the traitor? Del From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Mon Dec 20 14:43:35 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 14:43:35 -0000 Subject: Does the Order know about the prophecy? In-Reply-To: <20041219221654.26401.qmail@web53109.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120193 Juli wrote: "I think most of the Order members knew about the prophecy, including Snape, Arthur and Molly, Sirius and Lupin, otherwise they couldn't tell Harry seriously that he had to learn occlumency." Del replies: You too are making the connection between the Prophecy and Occlumency. But what I'm saying is that there isn't necessarily ANY connection between the two. We know IN RETROSPECT that LV was trying to lure Harry into the DoM all the time. But we have no proof that anybody EVER realised that, nor that anybody EVER imagined that LV would try to send a false vision to Harry to make him go to the DoM. So I really don't think we can assume that the Order members knew that Harry had to learn Occlumency so that LV couldn't send him a false vision in order to lure him into the DoM to get his Prophecy. It can be as simple as : LV has repeatedly shown that he wants Harry dead (out of revenge maybe) so now that we know that he is aware of the connection, we must expect the worst, possession, and teach Harry to protect himself. No need for the Order to know about the Prophecy, and yet way enough information for those of them who care deeply about Harry to turn hysterical. Juli wrote: "I agree but not all the way, the Order MUST know a lot more than Harry, would any of them be willing to risk their life without knowing anything a lot?" Del replies: The Order members are not risking their lives for Harry specifically. They are risking their lives to fight LV. There's no need for them to know about the Prophecy for them to take such risks. The members of the Original Order were risking their lives long before the Prophecy was even made. Del From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Mon Dec 20 14:46:09 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 14:46:09 -0000 Subject: A child is, by definition, WRONG In-Reply-To: <20041219222411.99264.qmail@web53108.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120194 Juli wrote: "I first thought that they didn't want to tell anything in front of Snape, I'm as always they were thinking that Snape was the bad guy so they didn't want to risk themselves. IMO of course." Del replies: That's interesting! Do you have any canon to support that? I remember them suspecting Draco, but interestingly enough, I don't remember them suspecting Snape, though he should logically have been their prime suspect. Del From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Mon Dec 20 14:51:25 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 06:51:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] You're in the Army, now. wasFalse Alarm? Was:Re: Adults "failing" Harry (in tP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041220145125.42956.qmail@web53102.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120195 > Neri wrote: > "As I say, it is not 100% certain, but I'd say it is at least 95% > certain that they know that there's a prophecy in the DoM, that > only > Harry and Voldy can retrieve it, and that it says only Harry can > vanquish Voldy. It is also obvious DD told them very specifically > not > to tell Harry. And it would be very strange if Sirius, Lupin, > Arthur and Molly know this, but Snape doesn't." Personally, I think the only two people who know the prophecy are Harry and Dumbledore. The others know there is a prophecy, it concerns Voldemort and Harry, that Voldemort is very keen to possess it and that possessing it will be a Bad Thing for Harry and the WW. There's less need for them to know what's in it than that Voldemort really wants it. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Send holiday email and support a worthy cause. Do good. http://celebrity.mail.yahoo.com From madettebeau at gmail.com Mon Dec 20 14:54:23 2004 From: madettebeau at gmail.com (madlysarcastic) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 14:54:23 -0000 Subject: Does the Order know about the prophecy? In-Reply-To: <20041219221654.26401.qmail@web53109.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120196 Juli wrote: > I think most of the Order members knew about the > prophecy, including Snape, Arthur and Molly, Sirius > and Lupin, otherwise they couldn't tell Harry > seriously that he had to learn occlumency. After > Christmas at 12GP and the snake vision, Dumbledore > realized the connection worked both ways, and he asked > Snape to teach him occlumency, Sirius must have known > because he had a letter from DD and he wouldn't allow > Harry to spend all this time with Snape if there > wasn't a good reason. Maddy: I disagree. I don't think most of the Order members knew about the Prophecy. I think it *likely* that Dumbledore told Sirius, and that Sirius told Lupin. I think it's also possible that Molly knew. The three of them seem to be the most anxious about Harry's safety throughout OotP, and I think it's because A) They all care about Harry strongly, and B) The knowledge of the Prophecy was new to them. Dumbledore is obviously concerned about Harry regarding the Prophecy, but he's had this knowledge for some time. But the main reason why I don't think the Order knows is that DD *must* have learned his lesson from the last Voldy war. Possibly everything DD told the Order back then, was passed on by Wormtail to LV. Now, I'm not suggesting that DD suspects there's a spy amoungst the current Order (although, that would be an interesting bit of a drama), but I think DD would be *very* cafeful with this type of information. I think DD must have only told James and Lily about it, as well as Frank and Alice Longbottom. It is possible that the Potters told Sirius about it since he became Harry's Godfather, but they didn't have to have. Given what we know about Sirius's loyalty, I would think it quite possible that all they had to do was say that they and/or Harry was in grave danger and he'd leap at the chance to help in any way he could. I think that given the kind of misinformation some of the Order members have displayed with regard to Harry's dreams, I don't think DD has told them a great deal about it. For instance, in St. Mungo's, Moody says something about Voldemort "possessing" Harry, which Dumbledore knows is not the case. Also, at one point Tonks ponders about whether or not Harry's dreams can be considered Seeing (as in a "Seer"). I don't think DD has told them a great deal about the interconnections between Harry and Voldemort, and I doubt he's told them all about the Prophecy. I think that he may have just told the Order that since Harry was the V-man's downfall before, LV is hell bent on killing Harry now, so they have to protect him. With Snape, however, Dumbledore must have told him in a little more detail about Harry's dreams, but again, it's pretty much on a need-to-know basis. > Del: > > 2. I think DD acts with his subordinates in the very > > same way he acts with Harry : on a need-to-know basis. > > Strictly speaking, the Order members don't need to know > > about the Prophecy, so DD might not have told them. > > Juli: I agree but not all the way, the Order MUST know > a lot more than Harry, would any of them be willing to > risk their life without knowing anything a lot? Maddy: I think the Order knows more about the details of Voldemort's and Death Eater whereabouts and their activities, but as I said above, I don't think they know about the Prophecy. At most, I think they might know that there *is* a Prophecy about Harry and Voldy, and that they had to guard it, etc. But I really don't think they know what the Prophecy *said*. Think about it, it's what Voldy has been after since the end of GoF, if every one in the Order knew what it said, they would all be in a lot greater danger, and one of them could easily spill the beans (on purpose or not). I think that the less people know the contents of the Prophecy, the better, and Dumbledore wants to keep it that way. Why would they be willing to risk their lives without a lot of reason to back it up? I think that's part of the job description of the Order, unfortunately. I think, similarly to joining the Death Eaters and the DA, joining the Order must mean that you are very much against Voldemort and want to help stop him, and highly loyal the leader and trust him. It doesn't quite sit right to think of someone blindly risking their life, but I think they're probably given a vague reason such as "Harry's in danger", or "If Voldemort gets that Prophecy he'll have a big advantage", then that's good enough for an Order member. =) Maddy From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Mon Dec 20 15:03:18 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 15:03:18 -0000 Subject: Snape as bully/teacher/protector/disciplinarian/nemesis/ally... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120197 Lupinlore wrote: " Where I think Snape *can* most certainly be faulted is in not owning up to the fact of his deficiency. He is an adult and should be wise enough to know what his own weaknesses are. If he can't teach Harry effectively, he should own up to that, very vigorously if need be. You don't ask alcoholics to tend bar, and that is what Snape teaching Harry amounts to. Perhaps Snape did try to explain this to DD, but if so we have no evidence of it." Del replies: Well, we wouldn't, would we? Snape is a lot of bad things, but he does respect DD and I don't think he would tell Harry that he fought DD's decision tooth and nail. But I do read some things he said when telling Harry that he was going to teach him Occlumency, back in 12GP, as meaning that Snape strongly disagreed with the Headmaster on that matter, but he would go with it because DD wanted to. There's also DD pleading with Harry to work hard at Occlumency and do everything Snape tells him to, just before leaving Hogwarts, which could indicate that Snape had indeed been strongly complaining. Lupinlore wrote: "I think where Snape is at fault, as I said above, is in not owning up to the fact, while there was still time to do something else, that he *just couldn't do it.*" Del replies: But isn't it exactly what he did by throwing Harry out of his office and refusing to go on with the lessons? And the fact that he didn't change his mind even though we suspect that Lupin and maybe DD contacted him, seems to be an indication of how deep his resolve was. Del From willsonkmom at msn.com Mon Dec 20 15:21:38 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 15:21:38 -0000 Subject: whine, whine, whine and an old FILK Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120198 I gave a twist to my time turner and ventured back to 2001 to look at the posts. To my surprise there is a great big pun running throughout the series of HP books and I never saw it. Of course, I'm not a native British speaker, ya'll, so maybe I'm not the only one who missed it. I've copied Coriolan's filk to Sirius_3lack's explanation on the pronounciation of Little Whinging. These Golden Oldies remind me of Wolfman Jack. (I don't know if any of the links are still active.) "sirius_3lack" wrote: > > > > it is pronounced "win-jing" - but to whinge (winj) is to whine. > > > > whinge (hwinj, winj) > > intr.v. Chiefly British whinged, whing?ing, whing?es > > To complain or protest, especially in an annoying or persistent > > manner. > > > > Sirius > Coriolan wrote: > Summer Whinge (from CoS, Chap 1) > > (To the tune of Summer Wine) > > Hear the original at: > > http://www.foxlink.net/~bobnbren/1960s.html > > Dedicated to Sirius_3lack > > THE SCENE: 4 Privet Drive. HARRY laments his return to Little > Whinging. > > HARRY > I came back home with magic things from my first year > The Dursleys greeted me with loathing and with fear > They seized my wands and robes, on Hedwig they infringed > They now inflict on me summer whinge > > HARRY & THE DURSLEYS > Ohh-oh-oh summer whinge > > HARRY > It's hocus pocus and my magic kitchen word > My summer in Little Whinging is so absurd > I labor at my chores, the sun my neck does singe > And so it gives to me summer whinge > > HARRY & THE DURSLEYS > Ohh-oh-oh summer whinge > > HARRY > My owl was locked up and no letter came my way > It seemed that Ron and Herm had nothing more to say > The Dursley's dinner plans could only make me cringe > And so I proceed with summer whinge > > It's squiggly wiggly and a hedgerow-burning spell > My summer in Little Whinging becomes pure hell > I'm starved throughout the day while Dudley's on a binge > And so I give voice to summer whinge > > HARRY & THE DURSLEYS > Ohh-oh-oh summer whinge > > HARRY > Though it's my birthday I'm to stay within my room > Vernon says just one sound, and I'll face certain doom > Of kindness and concern he betrays not a twinge > He's giving me some more summer whinge > > HARRY & THE DURSLEYS > Ohh-oh-oh summer whinge > > HARRY > It's jiggery-pokery and a flying frying pan > A summer in Whinging is worse than Azkaban > Why must relations spring from the lunatic fringe? > > DURSLEYS > So we can give to you summer whinge > > DOBBY (from behind the bushes) > Mmm-mm summer whinge .. > > - CMC > > HARRY POTTER FILKS > http://home.att.net/~coriolan/hpfilks.htm From stevejjen at earthlink.net Mon Dec 20 15:29:38 2004 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 15:29:38 -0000 Subject: Trelawny has not lost ALL her marbles... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120199 mhbobbin: > I'm with you. I think JKR works overtime to convince us that > Trelawney is a fraud. In posts from the July-August period, there > was considerable discussion on this. Someone examined all of > Trelawney's predictions, and came up with a 50-50 ratio for > accuracy. Of course, some outcomes are still to be determined. > > I try to focus on what Trelawney actually sees, not what she says > she sees. Jen: This is an interesting thought. Do you mean times Trelawney spouts off a prediction without thinking too much about it, like when she said Harry will have twelve children and be MOM? It would fit in with JKR's sly sense of humor to give Trelawney some glory in the end. mhbobbin: > I'm particularly interested in that prediction in OOTP > where she sees danger (yet again) for Harry in everything, including > when he's eating his porridge. That one raised my eyebrows, along > with Harry's prediction to the OWLS Examiner that she would meet a > dark, soggy stranger. (Wormtail anyone?) Jen: Ooh, that's good. The examiner was Marchbanks, and since she loudly reported knowing Dumbledore and vouching for his skills, maybe she became a target. That makes me wonder about Wormtail again. Maybe his job in OOTP was searching for DD using his animagus abilities? Who better to search the Hog's Head and all the little nooks and crannies of the WW. Then when Prof. Marchbanks starts praising Dumbledore, Wormtail decides to capture her and Crucio for info about DD. After all, Neville said his Gran and Marchbanks are friends and both support Dumbledore. They could have been helping him hide out somewhere..... Jen From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Mon Dec 20 15:57:03 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 15:57:03 -0000 Subject: You're in the Army, now. wasFalse Alarm? Was:Re: Adults "failing" Harry (in tP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120200 > Neri wrote: > "As I say, it is not 100% certain, but I'd say it is at least 95% > certain that they know that there's a prophecy in the DoM, that only > Harry and Voldy can retrieve it, and that it says only Harry can > vanquish Voldy. It is also obvious DD told them very specifically not > to tell Harry. And it would be very strange if Sirius, Lupin, Arthur > and Molly know this, but Snape doesn't." > > Del replies: > But it's those 5% that bother me, because they leave too much wiggle > room for DD to have played another one of his tricks. > > Even if DD told the Order about the existence of the Prophecy, I > really don't think he told all the members of the Order what the > Prophecy says, because of one obvious reason : it's way too dangerous. > If LV gets a hold of one of the members, he could get the answer to > his quest without having to reveal himself. > > So I'm pretty sure that DD must have ommitted some part of the truth. > But just how much, we don't know. > Neri: OK, I should have been more precise: I think DD only told them the FIRST part of the prophecy. LV already knows about it, so there's no danger at all. This means they know that Harry "has the power to vanquish the Dark Lord" but not any details. But this would be enough for them to understand that Harry is not merely a boy that Voldy somehow didn't manage to kill and now bears him a grudge. Harry is a key for winning the war, and guarding him is a major objective of the Order. And the Order members should better know what are their objectives (or at least those that LV already know). So I agree that DD has omitted some of the truth. Probably very few people (perhaps only himself and now Harry) know the second part of the prophecy. If you suspect the Order members didn't know that Harry is an anti- Voldemort weapon, then how do you explain the strange behavior of Molly, Sirius and Lupin? And what was it that DD has forbidden them, by Molly's explicit and "heavily emphasized" words, to tell Harry? Neri From yutu75es at yahoo.es Mon Dec 20 16:22:57 2004 From: yutu75es at yahoo.es (fridwulfa hagrid) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 17:22:57 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] You're in the Army, now. wasFalse Alarm? Was:Re: Adults "failing" Harry (in tP) References: <20041220145125.42956.qmail@web53102.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <005001c4e6b0$2c361170$8000a8c0@casa> No: HPFGUIDX 120201 magda wrote: > Personally, I think the only two people who know the prophecy are > Harry and Dumbledore. The others know there is a prophecy, it > concerns Voldemort and Harry, that Voldemort is very keen to possess > it and that possessing it will be a Bad Thing for Harry and the WW. > Me (Fridwulfa) Are you sure??? The Potters were told the prophecy, they knew the exact wording of it. Don't you think James would have told Sirius?? I think he did, he told Sirius the prophecy in its whole, he wanted him to be his secret keeper after all. I don't think they told Lupin, because they suspected he was the spy and they certainly didn't told Peter, but I'm possitivee Sirius knew what it was about. Cheers, Fridwulfa From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Mon Dec 20 17:14:17 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (Barry Arrowsmith) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 17:14:17 +0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries Message-ID: <94C5ED30-52AA-11D9-B015-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120202 I missed the fun and games on the board yesterday, it was the sort of thread that at one time I'd have leapt into with glad cries. Not so inclined to do so now; when you've done it 3 and 4 times on the same subject, well, it's something to skip over while looking for something more engaging. Things have calmed down a bit now, spleens are vented, bile spilled and all will be calm and peaceful - until the next time. However, one thing was said which particularly caught my eye: > Will your next posts defended Voldemort murdering James & Lily and then trying to kill an fourteen month baby. > It's been done. Plus others not so much defending as explaining or justifying their deaths. And done logically, calmly and using canon as supportive evidence. What amazes me is that so many posters are so ignorant of what has gone before on the site. Yeah, OK, Yahoo!Mort is a mess, finding old threads is a chore and when members join the first thing they want to do is post and to see their names and thoughts on the board. Understandable, I suppose. Me, I'd be stricter (entirely compatible with my sadistic tendencies), I'd make each new poster take a test after one month to ensure that they had at least a passing acquaintance with the major theories that have been suggested in the past. If they didn't reach a certain standard they'd stay moderated until they did reach the standard. I can hear the predictable cries of horror from the Elves, not because they want to hide past posts but because they've got more than enough to do already. It's reasonable to expect that any new joiner will have an interest in and knowledge of the books, though since the release of the films this is no longer something that can be taken for granted. There have been transients this last summer who have seen the films but not read the books. IMO it would be equally reasonable to expect that members should have some knowledge of the history and content of the site. At the very least this would encompass the Fantastic Posts and probably also the Recommended Posts. One of the basic tenets of the board is that any theory, any opinion is valid until overtaken or definitively ruled out by canon, though even here things can get stretched - you've only got to look at the number of fans who think Sirius is going to come back, no matter that JKR has said he's dead. Delve into the quicksand that is FanFiction and not even those strictures hold - it's an "anything goes" sub-culture. This site has been up and running for over 4 years now with a membership in the thousands. Do you really think that just about every possibility, no matter how unlikely hasn't been discussed already? I signed up before the last book came out and I like to think of myself as pretty smart and devious with a penchant for conspiracy and betrayal theories; but my ideas look mundane besides those of some of the past posters. A lot of the old mob were still active then, and they used site shorthand a lot; ESE, MAGIC DISHWASHER; FAITH; GEORGE; FEATHERBOA; LOON; etc. etc. If I didn't want to appear ignorant it was necessary to make an effort, and the effort brought it's own reward - the arcane knowledge of the board itself. That doesn't mean you have to agree with the theories of course, in fact it's better if you don't, much more fun can be had. We are after all discussing a piece of fantasy fiction; until it's finally completed nothing is unthinkable, anything is possible within the boundaries JKR has set. And those boundaries are pretty wide and fairly elastic. In such circumstances it pays to be objective, not subjective. I be very surprised if what we read in the books isn't very carefully crafted; there's a reason for everything of note (and quite a lot that doesn't at first sight appear to be of note) and very little is random pagefiller. Trouble can arise when posters closely identify HP with the RW and others don't. I'm one of the don'ts. It's most definitely not the RW so why try to equate one with the other? I just can't comprehend why folk should get so worked up about so-called abuse and emotional trauma when it's a 'given' of the story, when it's *deliberately* contrived and constructed by the author. Sure, it's maybe unfortunate that a fictional construct has to fictionally suffer fictional hardship. Do I feel sorry for him? Not so's you'd notice, no. No more than I feel sorry for Humpty Dumpty or the Dormouse in Alice. I'll go where Jo leads me. If it doesn't tie up satisfactorily at the end, then I'll start moaning about characterisations and plot arc, not before. With such characterisations I immediately start wondering why is it set up like this? What's the reason? This isn't a case study for budding social workers, it's a fantasy adventure mostly aimed at youngsters, isn't it? Since I refuse to believe that JKR is being gratuitously nasty there's probably some motivation behind such behaviour. Usually it's possible to come up with some sort of rationalisation with at least some basis in canon that'll do until more information becomes available. I won't bore you with ideas that I've posted; sufficient to say that there are theories (from others as well as myself) as to *why* the Dursleys act the way they do, *why* Snape is so nasty, *why* DD trusts him and so on. One thing I am sure of - discussing the possibilities of why something is the way it is is infinitely more interesting than a sterile and pointless trading of "Oh yes he is," "Oh no he isn't." You want to know what the theories are? Look 'em up. And while you're searching you'll probably find other things you didn't know about too. There are an awful lot of theories back there - some wondrous, some fantastic, some farcical. Enjoy them. Relish them. Even hate them. But treat them for what they are - theories. Attempts to explain the whys and wherefores of the story, attempts to explain what the hell is going on. In two books time it'll all stop, there'll be definitive canon that can't be countered, all the important stuff will be explained (it'd better be!) and all that'll be left will be minor nit-picking or FF. It'd be a pity if all those theories lovingly constructed over the years were ignored until then, too late for worthwhile discussion and it just being a question of marking them as right or wrong. Where's the fun in that? Kneasy From foxmoth at qnet.com Mon Dec 20 18:10:43 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 18:10:43 -0000 Subject: You're in the Army, now. wasFalse Alarm? Was:Re: Adults "failing" Harry (in tP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120203 > > Pippin: > > What the Order's been told, I imagine, is what Voldemort was allowed to think--that the prophecy would tell him how to destroy Harry. Molly would naturally not want Harry to be told that. But Dumbledore had a much better reason than Molly for not wanting Harry to be told this -- he knew it wasn't true. << Lupinlore: > Interesting. Can you quote any canon to support this, Pippin? I'm not saying you're wrong, but I don't recall this in OOTP. I don't recall anyone ever saying WHAT Voldie thought the prophecy was. < Pippin: Dumbledore speaking, re:Voldemort,ch 37, "He knew the prophecy had been made, though he did not know its full contents. He set out to kill you when you were still a baby, believing he was fulfilling the terms of the prophecy. He discovered, to his cost, that he was mistaken, when the curse intended to kill you backfired. And so, since his return to his body, and particularly since your extraordinary escape from him last year, he has been determined to hear that prophecy in its entirety. This is the weapon he has been seeking so assiduously since his return: the knowledge of how to destroy you." As we know, the prophecy doesn't contain instructions for destroying Harry, so if Dumbledore was letting Snape and Molly think that it did, he would have very good reasons for not wanting this information shared with Harry. It would also mean that Snape need not know that Harry is the only one who can vanquish Voldemort. He may not know the true contents of any of the prophecy, even the first part. Pippin From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Mon Dec 20 18:24:27 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 10:24:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] You're in the Army, now. wasFalse Alarm? Was:Re: Adults "failing" Harry (in tP) In-Reply-To: <005001c4e6b0$2c361170$8000a8c0@casa> Message-ID: <20041220182427.2068.qmail@web53103.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120204 >> magda wrote: >> Personally, I think the only two people who know the prophecy are >> Harry and Dumbledore. The others know there is a prophecy, it >> concerns Voldemort and Harry, that Voldemort is very keen to >> possess it and that possessing it will be a Bad Thing for Harry >> and the WW. > > > Me (Fridwulfa) > Are you sure??? The Potters were told the prophecy, they knew the > exact wording of it. Don't you think James would have told Sirius?? > I think he did, he told Sirius the prophecy in its whole, he wanted > him to be his secret keeper after all. I don't think they told > Lupin,because they suspected he was the spy and they certainly > didn't told Peter, but I'm possitivee Sirius knew what it was about. > Cheers, > Fridwulfa Okay, let me amend my earlier statement: the only two people ALIVE AT THE END OF OOTP who know the prophecy are Harry and Dumbledore. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Dec 20 18:25:04 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 18:25:04 -0000 Subject: One last try (re: Parenting Harry (was: Re: I don't like him much)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120205 Eloise: snip. Is it clear where I'm coming from? (I'm not addressing imamommy now.) I'm not commenting on the validity of the rules, the necessity sometime to break them, the style of enforcing them, the virtue of the characters, just on there being a role of being the rule-upholder. Above all, I am not commenting on, approving of or disapproving of Snape's actions. snip. > I have said that Snape performs a particular function in the text, > one which I described as being the unpalatable side of parenting, > being the Enforcer, if you like. (Just as a side note, although I > defined this as a parenting role, it doesn't then necessitate that > the role will be performed well.) Alla: Let me try one more time again, because I think we really are talking past each other. Look at the first part of your quote I snipped. If we are not commenting on Snape's motivations and methods, but just on the fact that he functions as rule upholder, then, sure I can agree that he does that in the text.(unfairly, sadistically, IMO, but formally - sure, I can agree) But in the second part of your quote I snipped, you compare what Snape does (being the rule upholder) with PARENTING and that I really disagree with. I cannot compare what Snape does with being a parent, because parent does NOT in my opinion and experience upholds the rules the way Snape does. Parent can NOT by my definition be a sadist towards a child, even if the child breaks the rules. In short - yes, I can agree that one of Snape's functions in the text is to uphold the rules, but the way he does that, IMO, does not give him a right to be called a PARENT, even metaphorically. Enforcer - sure (who errs on the sadistic side), but not a PARENT, not in my opinion at least. From spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com Mon Dec 20 18:34:15 2004 From: spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com (dungrollin) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 18:34:15 -0000 Subject: You're in the Army, now. wasFalse Alarm? Was:Re: Adults "failing" Harry (in tP) In-Reply-To: <20041220182427.2068.qmail@web53103.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120206 > >> magda wrote: > >> Personally, I think the only two people who know the prophecy > >> are Harry and Dumbledore. The others know there is a prophecy, > >> it concerns Voldemort and Harry, that Voldemort is very keen to > >> possess it and that possessing it will be a Bad Thing for Harry > >> and the WW. > > > > > > Fridwulfa responded: > > Are you sure??? The Potters were told the prophecy, they knew the > > exact wording of it. Don't you think James would have told > > Sirius?? > > I think he did, he told Sirius the prophecy in its whole, he > > wanted him to be his secret keeper after all. I don't think > > they told Lupin,because they suspected he was the spy and they > > certainly didn't told Peter, but I'm possitivee Sirius knew what > > it was about. > Magda replied: > Okay, let me amend my earlier statement: the only two people ALIVE > AT THE END OF OOTP who know the prophecy are Harry and Dumbledore. Dungrollin: Am I being horribly forgetful? Could someone please remind me where we have canon to say that James and Lily knew the prophecy? (And the complete one, at that.) I don't remember anything about it. Cheers, Dungrollin From amdorn at hotmail.com Mon Dec 20 16:07:56 2004 From: amdorn at hotmail.com (Abbi Dorn) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 11:07:56 -0500 Subject: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 34, "The Department of Mysteries" Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120207 Summary: The chapter begins with Harry, Luna, and Neville getting on the thestrals, preparing to travel to the Ministry of Magic. After a bit of confusion, Luna proceeds to help Ron, Hermione, and Ginny "mount" the thestrals before returning to her own thestral. Harry tells his thestral to take them to the Ministry of Magic's visitors' entrance with uncertainty before the thestrals swiftly begin the trip. When they land in London and are safely on the ground, Harry leads the others to the phone booth entrance. When all are safely inside the booth, Ron dials 6-2-4-4-2 and Harry says to the automated voice that they are visiting to save someone. After the group has their badges, which state their names and "Rescue Mission" the phone booth slides down to the Atrium level of the Ministry of Magic. Harry already has his wand out and ready for any resistance they might encounter. The group finds a deserted Atrium; even the person responsible for weighing all visitors wands is absent. Harry leads the group to the lifts, in order to reach the ninth level, the same level as the door from his dreams. Before Harry enters the door he suggests that not everyone should enter the Department. This suggestion is met with dissent from Ginny, Neville, and Ron before Harry acquiesces and they all enter the Department of Mysteries. Upon entering, Harry tells someone to shut the door, and instantly wishes he would not have done that, as the circular room begins to spin. Once the room stops spinning, the first door that Harry tries opens into a room with brains suspended in liquid. Ron notices the room has doors leading to other places, but Harry immediately dismisses the doors by using his dream as a reference. After the group has left the "brain" room, but before Luna can close the door, Hermione marks the door with a magical "x" for future reference of what doors they had opened unsuccessfully. The circular room spins again before stopping with one door emblazoned with a red "x". The next door Harry chooses leads to a room with a sunken center, similar to the chambers that Harry encountered during his trial the previous summer. In the center of the bottom is a stone dais on which stands an ancient archway with a black curtain that flutters despite the complete stillness around it. When Harry moves closer to investigate, Harry can hear voices coming from behind the curtain. Harry, Neville, and Ginny are entranced by the veil. Only Hermione seems to be afraid. Hermione urges Harry away from the veil and succeeds only by mentioning Sirius. The group enters the circular room for a third time to watch the room spin before trying another door. Unable to open the third door with pushing, "Alohomora," or the knife Sirius gave Harry (which melts), Hermione marks that door with a fiery "x" and the room spins again. On their fourth try, they finally find the correct room. Harry recognizes the room immediately and proceeds to lead the group to the door from his dreams, located behind the bell jar which encases the progress of an egg into a hummingbird and back again. Upon entering the final room on their quest Harry sees shelves of glass orbs. The first row Harry sees is number 53. Hermione points the group to the right toward row 97, which Harry said was their destination. Once the group reaches the correct row, Harry looks for but neither finds Sirius nor signs of Sirius's struggle. Ron points out a glass orb labeled as "S.P.T. to A.P.W.B.D., Dark Lord, and (?) Harry Potter." Despite Hermione and Neville's urging otherwise, Harry picks up the orb to find it warm to the touch. Before Harry can further investigate the orb a voice stops the group with the following words, "Very good, Potter. Now turn around, nice and slowly, and give that to me." Questions: 1) Thestrals obviously understand human language since they were able to understand Harry's instructions. Why is that? Can most magical animal/beasts/beings understand the human language? 2) Why didn't Harry and Neville help Ron, Hermione, and Ginny onto the thestrals? 3) Why was Luna acting as if she had ridden a thestral before? Is it from her natural demeanor or could she have previous experience riding a thestral? 4) When riding the Thestrals to the Ministry of Magic, could the riders be seen? Can only people who see thestrals normally be able to see the riders during flight? 5) What happened to the thestrals after the group goes into the phone booth? Do they have to be retrieved? 6) Why doesn't the Ministry of Magic have an alarm go off when people enter after business hours? What about security surrounding the Ministry? What about their badges? Shouldnt some alarm go off when the badges were made to say "Rescue Mission"? 7) What happened to the person in charge of weighing the visitors wands? 8) Is the Ministry of Magic really deserted after business hours? What about aurors? Shouldn't they work in shifts or be in and out of the Ministry at odd hours? 9) Does the Ministry of Magic lack security on all levels? Could the security have been removed by the Death Eaters? If so, what could have been the security measures? 10) What is the Ministry doing with Brains? Is it purely for research on how the brain works or are the brains from famous witches and wizards? Like the rumor that people have kept Einstein's brain in a jar because of his genius. 11) What is the mystery behind the veil? Where did the veil come from? If the veil really is that dangerous, why not have the room locked? Who are the voices? Do different people hear different voices when they are close to the veil? 12) Why is Hermione not affected by the veil like Harry and the others? She is almost hysterical when trying to pry Harry away from the veil. What does she know or understand differently? 13) Why won't Sirius's knife open the door to the locked room? Is this the "love" room Dumbledore speaks of later in the book? Why does Sirius's knife melt? Can the blade be repaired? 14) Seems there must be significance to the prophecy being in row 97, any ideas? Could it be the year that the prophecy will come true? What about row 53, is there significance that this was the first row seen by the group upon entering the hall of prophecy. 15) When Harry doesn't find Sirius being tortured, he deals with his mistake by treating his friends horribly. Is this a direct result of his up-bringing? 16) Why was Neville hesitant when Harry reaches for the orb? Does Harry take his friends intuition for granted? 17) Why was the orb/prophecy warm? Why were some of the orbs as dull and dark as blown out light bulbs while others glowed? Amdorn P.S. I wanted to give thanks to Penapart Elf for proof reading for me. From willsonkmom at msn.com Mon Dec 20 18:56:24 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 18:56:24 -0000 Subject: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 34, "The Department of Mysteries" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120208 >>Amdorn wrote: 10) What is the Ministry doing with Brains? Is it purely for research on how the brain works or are the brains from famous witches and wizards? Like the rumor that people have kept Einstein's brain in a jar because of his genius. Potioncat: Good question. We've never had a hint before that the Ministry had any brains at all. >>Amdorn: > 17) Why was the orb/prophecy warm? Why were some of the orbs as dull and dark as blown out light bulbs while others glowed? Potioncat: Could the warm ones still be effect, or still waiting to happen, while the dark ones had already come to light/already happened? From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Mon Dec 20 19:02:06 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 11:02:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] You're in the Army, now. wasFalse Alarm? Was:Re: Adults "failing" Harry (in tP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041220190207.39680.qmail@web53108.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120209 > Dungrollin: > > Am I being horribly forgetful? Could someone please remind me > where > we have canon to say that James and Lily knew the prophecy? (And > the complete one, at that.) I don't remember anything about it. It doesn't explicitly say that they knew it but I think it's a safe bet that before they went into hiding for what might have been an indefinite period of weeks, months, years or even decades, they would have to have a reason for it, and since it concerned their child, that Dumbledore would have told them. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The all-new My Yahoo! - What will yours do? http://my.yahoo.com From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Mon Dec 20 19:05:33 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 19:05:33 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries In-Reply-To: <94C5ED30-52AA-11D9-B015-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120210 mcmaxslb asked Del: > Will your next posts defended Voldemort murdering James & Lily and > then trying to kill an fourteen month baby. Kneasy replied: It's been done. Plus others not so much defending as explaining or justifying their deaths. And done logically, calmly and using canon as supportive evidence. SSSusan: Yep, and it makes perfect sense that some have delved into this. We've talked quite a bit about Voldy since I've been here [I joined just as OotP came out in 6/03], and since Voldy has yet to appear to be the awe-some Evil Overlord we expect him [and many of us *want* him] to be, sure, we've talked about what he's done, why, what was effective, and etc. Discussion of something doesn't equal condoning it. Nor does my *wanting* Voldy to be a really bad guy mean that I am defending what he does. Au contraire. It just makes for a better story ? a more believable storyline for Harry & crew to be following. Kneasy: What amazes me is that so many posters are so ignorant of what has gone before on the site. Yeah, OK, Yahoo!Mort is a mess, finding old threads is a chore and when members join the first thing they want to do is post and to see their names and thoughts on the board. Understandable, I suppose. Me, I'd be stricter (entirely compatible with my sadistic tendencies), I'd make each new poster take a test after one month to ensure that they had at least a passing acquaintance with the major theories that have been suggested in the past. If they didn't reach a certain standard they'd stay moderated until they did reach the standard. IMO it would be equally reasonable to expect that members should have some knowledge of the history and content of the site. At the very least this would encompass the Fantastic Posts and probably also the Recommended Posts. SSSusan: An interesting idea. Not sure how I feel about an actual quiz... but then again, maybe?! I'm sure many people would object to the length of some of the FPs. But if the rule were for a newbie to just sit & watch for, say, two weeks, before being allowed to post, there would be time to go read the FPs. Not to mention doing so would help adjust one to the amount of traffic this list can generate! As for me, I know I found & devoured the [what a surprise!] Severus Snape section of FP before I ever even dreamed of posting here. It *is* thrilling to find such a huge group of other adults who share one's enthusiasm for the Potterverse, and thus it's understandable that people want to start posting right away because of it -- and to dislike being moderated at the start, but I think moderation is a wise step in the process. It's a lot of work for the elves(!) but helpful for making sure newbies understand snipping and crediting, etiquette, etc. I'd be curious what others think about the idea of having a required reading prerequisite for posting privileges? Kneasy: Trouble can arise when posters closely identify HP with the RW and others don't. I'm one of the don'ts. It's most definitely not the RW so why try to equate one with the other? I just can't comprehend why folk should get so worked up about so-called abuse and emotional trauma when it's a 'given' of the story, when it's *deliberately* contrived and constructed by the author. Sure, it's maybe unfortunate that a fictional construct has to fictionally suffer fictional hardship. Do I feel sorry for him? Not so's you'd notice, no. No more than I feel sorry for Humpty Dumpty or the Dormouse in Alice. I'll go where Jo leads me. If it doesn't tie up satisfactorily at the end, then I'll start moaning about characterisations and plot arc, not before. With such characterisations I immediately start wondering why is it set up like this? What's the reason? This isn't a case study for budding social workers, it's a fantasy adventure mostly aimed at youngsters, isn't it? Since I refuse to believe that JKR is being gratuitously nasty there's probably some motivation behind such behaviour. Usually it's possible to come up with some sort of rationalisation with at least some basis in canon that'll do until more information becomes available. I won't bore you with ideas that I've posted; sufficient to say that there are theories (from others as well as myself) as to *why* the Dursleys act the way they do, *why* Snape is so nasty, *why* DD trusts him and so on. One thing I am sure of - discussing the possibilities of why something is the way it is is infinitely more interesting than a sterile and pointless trading of "Oh yes he is," "Oh no he isn't." You want to know what the theories are? Look 'em up. And while you're searching you'll probably find other things you didn't know about too. SSSusan: I always struggle with this "complaint" [for lack of a better term, Kneasy] about some of the posters' methods/interests at HPfGU. I am one of those who likely drives Kneasy to eye-rolling with my interest in social issues, emotional response, and etc. But, Kneasy, the way I see it, we're working towards the SAME THING. You went on, above, to talk about being interested in the *whys* of things -- *why* Snape is nasty, *why* the Dursleys act as they do, *why* DD trusts Snape. These are some of the very things I'm most fascinated by as well. In fact, getting at a *why* for many people involves looking at backgrounds, histories, significant events & relationships in characters' lifetimes, and, yes, emotions and the like. You're looking for whys and for "what will be"s based upon those whys, are you not? When someone else talks about Tom Riddle's orphan upbringing or the Dursleys' treatment of Harry, and possible impact or character reactions to those histories, how is that different? I think many of today's posters are looking for the whys and wherefores of the story, too. Whether looking for FACTS of a situation or of characters in a situation, or attempting to INTERPRET those facts, we're still all going towards motivation, aren't we? Or am I misunderstanding the distinction between your preference and the other? Perhaps you're talking about people who merely argue "for" or "against" a character based upon RW parallels, as opposed to advancing any sort of theory of the character's motivations or likely future actions? Kneasy: There are an awful lot of theories back there - some wondrous, some fantastic, some farcical. Enjoy them. Relish them. Even hate them. But treat them for what they are - theories. Attempts to explain the whys and wherefores of the story, attempts to explain what the hell is going on. In two books time it'll all stop, there'll be definitive canon that can't be countered, all the important stuff will be explained (it'd better be!) and all that'll be left will be minor nit- picking or FF. SSSusan: And with this I totally agree. The early theories & FPs set the stage, set the vernacular of this place. I need to go back and relish more of them than I have. Siriusly Snapey Susan From meriaugust at yahoo.com Mon Dec 20 19:30:26 2004 From: meriaugust at yahoo.com (meriaugust) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 19:30:26 -0000 Subject: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 34, "The Department of Mysteries" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120211 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Abbi Dorn" wrote: > Questions: > > 4) When riding the Thestrals to the Ministry of Magic, could the riders be > seen? Can only people who see thestrals normally be able to see the riders > during flight? Meri: I would assume the Thestrals couldn't be seen, but the people riding on them might be visible - which makes taking the Thestrals to London just as stupid as stealing the Ford Anglia. > 6) Why doesn't the Ministry of Magic have an alarm go off when people enter > after business hours? What about security surrounding the Ministry? What > about their badges? Shouldn't some alarm go off when the badges were made > to say "Rescue Mission"? > > 7) What happened to the person in charge of weighing the visitors' wands? > > 8) Is the Ministry of Magic really deserted after business hours? What > about aurors? Shouldn't they work in shifts or be in and out of the > Ministry at odd hours? > > 9) Does the Ministry of Magic lack security on all levels? Could the > security have been removed by the Death Eaters? If so, what could have been > the security measures? Meri: Tackling all these questions at once. I assume (as do many others) that the DEs "took care" of any security personell or late workers that night. I'm sure the MoM is very well protected but with LV and the DEs there is probably very little that could have gotten in their way. As to the hours the Aurors keep, you are right it doesn't seem like a 9-5 job, but then again with Fudge doing his best to keep LV "dead" he may also have been finding ways to keep the Aurors busy and therefore less suspiscious. From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Mon Dec 20 19:43:01 2004 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 19:43:01 -0000 Subject: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 34, "The Department of Mysteries" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120212 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Abbi Dorn" wrote: > > Questions: > > 2) Why didn't Harry and Neville help Ron, Hermione, and Ginny onto the > thestrals? Hickengruendler: I think there are two reasons. 1) Neville was fully occupied in mounting the Thestral himself, let alone helping the others. 2) Luna has the ability to sink around the box. I think she is the only one who actually considers the possibility to help others mounting a beast they can't see, because the deed itself is pretty extraordinaire. > > 4) When riding the Thestrals to the Ministry of Magic, could the riders be > seen? Can only people who see thestrals normally be able to see the riders > during flight? Hickengruendler: I wondered about this, too. Imagine Dudley in Smeltings seeing Harry flying past, without seeing the Thestral. > > 6) Why doesn't the Ministry of Magic have an alarm go off when people enter > after business hours? What about security surrounding the Ministry? What > about their badges? Shouldn't some alarm go off when the badges were made > to say "Rescue Mission"? Hickengruendler: Horrible security. I won't be surprised at all if this will have awful consequences. Although it was quite funny. Got the Death Eaters a badge as well? > 7) What happened to the person in charge of weighing the visitors' wands? Hickengruendler: He had finsihed work for this day? To be honest, if everyone can just apparate into the ministry, like the Death Eaters seem to have done (or am I mistaken), I don't see the sense of this wand registration at all. It's not that it would be any help, if the villains simply don't use this entrance. It's a surprise that nobody had killed Fudge in his sleep, so far. Maybe if he were a more competent minister, he would already be dead. > 11) What is the mystery behind the veil? Where did the veil come from? If > the veil really is that dangerous, why not have the room locked? Who are > the voices? Do different people hear different voices when they are close > to the veil? Hickengruendler: I think the veil is an allegory for the Christian view of the Afterlife. It is a symbolical entrance for the life after Death. And since the Unspeakables are examining the mystery of death, they can't lock the door. And while posting this, I finally realized what JKR meant, when she said that in book 5 Harry will find out exactly what death means, in even closer ways. > > 12) Why is Hermione not affected by the veil like Harry and the others? > She is almost hysterical when trying to pry Harry away from the veil. What > does she know or understand differently? Ron isn't affected, too. And I think the reason is, that Harry, Neville and Luna all lost someone dear, while Ginny was closer to death than everybody else (except Harry). That's why they reacted stronger to the veil, and Ron and Hermione, who are comparably more innocent, don't react. > 14) Seems there must be significance to the prophecy being in row 97, any > ideas? Could it be the year that the prophecy will come true? What about > row 53, is there significance that this was the first row seen by the group > upon entering the hall of prophecy. Hickengruendler: If (as expected) Harry will defeat Voldemort at the end of his last schoolyear, than it is already 1998. And since Voldemort needs some time to finally become more dangerous than ever before, I don't think he will die before the end of book 7. Therefore I doubt the numbers have any special meaning. > 16) Why was Neville hesitant when Harry reaches for the orb? Does Harry > take his friends' intuition for granted? Hickengruendler: Because Neville has enough to common sense to realize, that it might be a good thing, not to touch everything in a place, where they keep brains in bottles and have some scary veil. Potioncat: > Good question. We've never had a hint before that the Ministry had > any brains at all. *ROFL* Hickengruendler From eloiseherisson at aol.com Mon Dec 20 19:52:29 2004 From: eloiseherisson at aol.com (eloise_herisson) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 19:52:29 -0000 Subject: One last try (re: Parenting Harry (was: Re: I don't like him much)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120213 > Alla: > > Let me try one more time again, because I think we really are talking > past each other. Eloise: Definitely. > But in the second part of your quote I snipped, you compare what > Snape does (being the rule upholder) with PARENTING and that I really > disagree with. Eloise: I can understand that. If you think that being a parent necessarily involves warmth. Of course I was making the specific point that this is just one of the roles within that of parent. And yes, Snape goes way over the top in pursuit of it and is completely ineffective as a result, because Harry will naturally rebel (as, dare I say, children do against parents) and do whatever it is with perhaps more gusto than if it weren't forbidden in the first place. > I cannot compare what Snape does with being a parent, because parent > does NOT in my opinion and experience upholds the rules the way Snape > does. Parent can NOT by my definition be a sadist towards a child, > even if the child breaks the rules. Eloise: So a parent who is a bad parent, who is harsh or sadistic towards their child is not, by definition, a parent? There are a lot of bad parents around who treat their offspring far worse than Snape treats Harry. There are a lot of people who don't understand how to relate to children and go about things the wrong way, counter-productive ways, or simply ways which our particular society at this particular time disapproves of. Some cultures both now and particularly in the past tolerate or even encourage very different parenting practices from those we think ideal and the WW *is* a bit of another country where things are done differently, I feel.* I've argued this one before over something else, I think, but it does seem to be a much harsher world than ours. It's a world where in living memory school punishments have included being hung from the ceiling in chains and where in OoP the MoM again gives permission for the whipping of pupils. I'm not condoning, just saying that in the WW, I don't think Snape would be considered as sadistic as he would appear in our society (IIRC the worst that Ron ever says is that he's a git) and given the concern for Harry's welfare which *sometimes* seems to be present (although expressed in such a way that Harry wouldn't notice it) I'm prepared to think that Snape thinks he's doing the right thing, particularly in compensating for what he sees as Dumbledore's over- indulgence. And as you quoted me saying, > >although I > > defined this as a parenting role, it doesn't then necessitate that > > the role will be performed well.) Anyhow, it's a bit semantic really. My hypothesis was that Harry doesn't have a parent, therefore the parenting roles are split between various people, not necessarily done well, but done to some extent. Perhaps I'm wrong, then, and Harry isn't being parented at all. ~Eloise * this site gives an interesting insight into the normal practices of our ancestors: http://www.geocities.com/kidhistory/found/p45x50.htm >From which, "The evidence which I have collected on methods of disciplining children leads me to believe that a very large percentage of the children born prior to the eighteenth century were what would today be termed "battered children." Of over two hundred statements of advice on child-rearing prior to the eighteenth century which I have examined, most approved of beating children severely, and all allowed beating in varying circumstances except three" From willsonkmom at msn.com Mon Dec 20 19:57:45 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 19:57:45 -0000 Subject: Not liking Harry's character (was Parenting Harry ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120214 > Sigune delurks: I can't explain why, but more often than not when I read books (not just HP) I find that I am more fascinated by secondary characters. Most of the time they die halfway through the novel and leave me rather sad and looking out for a new favourite. Potioncat: JKR has spoiled us too. I was reading "Mansfield Park" and was taken by one of the secondary characters and was sad that I would never know his back story. Certainly, Jane Austin wasn't doing interviews or web pages. But with HP, we have a chance at learning a bit more. >Sigune: I think part of the magic of secondary characters - and Snape is a wonderful example - is that we simply do not know as much about them as we know about the main characters, but just enough to set us speculating. A lot is left to the reader's imagination, and you can fill in the gaps for yourself. That is how I (I can't speak for other people) get drawn into a narrative. Potioncat: For me, it was learning mid-way into SS/PS that Snape wasn't the bad guy. "What makes Snape tick?" became a big question as I read the books. And whether or not there is method to his madness, there is something more than we see. >Sigune: As for Snape, I personally hope JKR is never going to reveal his entire story (actually I think he's just not important enough for her to do so), so that the merry speculation can continue into infinity. Potioncat: No, he isn't important enough. And it says something about JKR that she's made so many of the secondary characters so rich. >Sigune: Make no mistake, I *like* reading about Harry, Ron and Hermione, and I want to know how their story goes; but as far as *fascination* goes, that lies with people like Snape and Dumbledore. Potioncat: Me too. > Sigune: By the way: my fascination for Snape only really started when I read the 'Worst Memory' chapter. I became a Snape fan because I *have been* bullied, not because I ever bullied anyone. Snape is interesting because of his inability to deal with his issues, and his character addresses matters that people who have been through similar experiences have to deal with - though hopefully in a better, more mature way than what he makes of it. Sorry. Just had to say my bit on that topic - as mcmaxslb would say, 'it touched a nerve'. Potioncat: I'll join in on this comment to mcmaxslb's belief that we Snape supporters were/are bullies. I fit in with Sigune's description above. On the other hand, I react to James (at 15) much like mcmaxslb does to Snape. And to be honest, I'm not sure what the difference is. Potioncat (glad that Severely Sigune delurked.) From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Dec 20 21:08:18 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 21:08:18 -0000 Subject: One last try (re: Parenting Harry (was: Re: I don't like him much)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120215 > > Alla earlier: > > But in the second part of your quote I snipped, you compare what > > Snape does (being the rule upholder) with PARENTING and that I > really > > disagree with. > > Eloise: > I can understand that. If you think that being a parent necessarily involves warmth. Of course I was making the specific point that this is just one of the roles within that of parent. And yes, Snape goes way over the top in pursuit of it and is completely ineffective as a result, because Harry will naturally rebel (as, dare I say, children do against parents) and do whatever it is with perhaps more gusto than if it weren't forbidden in the first place. Alla: Umm, I thought we were arguing semantics at this point, I guess not. TO ME, being parent includes being FAIR (I mean warmth will be nice and I am one of those types), but FAIR is a necessary requirement and Snape is not fair, IMO at least. Sure, children rebel against parents, but when we as adults look at those rebellions, we can determine that parent was correct in doing such and such thing, in assigning such punishment, therefore from my adult POV parent was doing the job right. When I as an adult look at Harry rebellions against Snape, I judge that Harry is RIGHT when he rebels against Snape most of the times ( not always, of course, but often) Eloise: So a parent who is a bad parent, who is harsh or sadistic towards their child is not, by definition, a parent? There are a lot of bad parents around who treat their offspring far worse than Snape treats Harry. Alla: I think that is beyond the point, actually. If there are parents who treat their children worse and I know there are, it does not make Snape to be the good one, IMO. If you determine Snape's function as "BAD PARENT", then I will concede to that, but not just a parent, not to me. Eloise: My hypothesis was that Harry doesn't have a parent, therefore the parenting roles are split between various people, not necessarily done well, but done to some extent. Perhaps I'm wrong, then, and Harry isn't being parented at all. Alla: It is not my place to decide whether you are wrong, but no, I don't think Harry is being parented by Snape. Dumbledore, Minerva, Molly, Sirius, Lupin - all of those people I can call Harry's parents, who screwed up badly at one point , but who had Harry's best interests in mind and who (which I think parent should have) love Harry. Sorry, but I don't think Snape can be called one. From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Mon Dec 20 21:12:51 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 21:12:51 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120216 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > I always struggle with this "complaint" [for lack of a better term, > Kneasy] about some of the posters' methods/interests at HPfGU. I am > one of those who likely drives Kneasy to eye-rolling with my interest > in social issues, emotional response, and etc. > > But, Kneasy, the way I see it, we're working towards the SAME THING. > You went on, above, to talk about being interested in the *whys* of > things -- *why* Snape is nasty, *why* the Dursleys act as they do, > *why* DD trusts Snape. These are some of the very things I'm most > fascinated by as well. In fact, getting at a *why* for many people > involves looking at backgrounds, histories, significant events & > relationships in characters' lifetimes, and, yes, emotions and the > like. > > You're looking for whys and for "what will be"s based upon those > whys, are you not? When someone else talks about Tom Riddle's orphan > upbringing or the Dursleys' treatment of Harry, and possible impact > or character reactions to those histories, how is that different? I > think many of today's posters are looking for the whys and wherefores > of the story, too. Whether looking for FACTS of a situation or of > characters in a situation, or attempting to INTERPRET those facts, > we're still all going towards motivation, aren't we? > > Or am I misunderstanding the distinction between your preference and > the other? Perhaps you're talking about people who merely > argue "for" or "against" a character based upon RW parallels, as > opposed to advancing any sort of theory of the character's > motivations or likely future actions? > > Kneasy: Likes and dislikes are part and parcel of membership and largely irrelevant to the point I was trying to make, however badly. Personally I hate SHIPs, anything fluffy and pop psychology. Others love 'em. Where I start to get restive is when, for example a thread starts and suddenly there's a load of posts castigating the Dursleys. Sure, they're pompous, opinionated, ultra-conventional and don't treat Harry well. For some that seems to be more than enough - they're nasty, possibly evil and DD should have known better than to leave Harry in their not so tender care. Full stop. Others may chime in and say it's not so bad really, Harry is sane and healthy, if maybe under-fed. Rarely do either camp dig deeper or consider the situation from the Dursleys point of view. But so far as I'm concerned the Dursleys POV could be important to the overall story - just possibly. Why do they treat Harry the way they do? Is there, in their own eyes at least, some sort of twisted justification? There could be. What if it's not hate but fear? Fear of anything magical. What if they fear magic as much as say, the wizard in the street fears Voldy? How would you expect them to react with a magical cuckoo thrust into their nest? Paranoia and denial, I'd think, just as they do now - especially as there's absolutely *nobody* they can talk to, nobody they can turn to. And if it turns out that Petunia's parents were casualties in the first Voldy unpleasantness then it'd be even more understandable. Certainly we now know that DD was in communication with Petunia *before* GH. This would indicate that maybe she's had contacts with the WW other than through her sister. So what happened? And did it help form her attitudes? And through her Vernon's? Just the sort of thing I like to wonder about. See, when I read the books I don't see them as presented as evil, I read them as held up to ridicule, a joke presentation of pompous conformity. As slight support I'd add that's the way they're shown in the films too. JKR has said that the character she dislikes most is Vernon, but she's never said why. Is it because of his reaction to Harry, or is it bigger, that he's the embodiment of unthinking middle- class ignorance? Guess which I'd go for? > > SSSusan: > And with this I totally agree. The early theories & FPs set the > stage, set the vernacular of this place. I need to go back and > relish more of them than I have. > Kneasy: Too true. One thing is notably different these days. It seemed much more light-hearted, even frivolous. More posters seem to take themselves much more seriously than they did back then. Not an improvement IMO. Too much like Vernon. From gbannister10 at aol.com Mon Dec 20 21:15:27 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 21:15:27 -0000 Subject: ADMIN: Rudeness and Insults, again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120217 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "hpfgu_elves" wrote: > > Hello, everyone-- > > Seems time to blow the dust off of this admin and give it another > run; we realize it's a bit late in the day for it, but we tried > contacting people offlist first. It would appear that some of those > people have yet to see the message they received from the elves, so > please check your inboxes. > > From the HBF: > "We welcome debate, but do not attack or insult other list members." > > Interpretations and opinions of canon are as varied as our > membership; debating and discussing these interpretations and sharing > opinions are the reasons for this group's existence. As adults, we > expect everyone here to accept that we are all entitled to our > opinions, and we expect that people should be able to disagree with > one another without being snide or insulting. > > Please keep your comments and critiques focused to the merits of the > argument. Do not attack or insult other list members. If you find > yourself losing your temper, don't hit 'Send'. Read your response > later and find a way to make your point without attacking others. > Please keep it civil. We reserve the right to pull offending threads > and to put repeat offenders back on moderated status. > > Also, thanks to all list members who've made the points listed above; > it's very appreciated! Geoff: May I add my twopennyworth here... I have been concerned in the last day or so about the aggressive arguments from some contributors put forward with scant regard to people's feeling or general netiquette which has happened occasionally from time to time on this group. Looking at it within the context of HPFGU and also of another Usenet group to which I belong, some of it has been "trolling", making controversial and confrontational statements in order to provoke a flame war. My Usenet group has adopted the catchphrase "Please don't feed the trolls", i.e. in such a situation, do not reply. If the instigator of such mischief is ignored, then hopefully he or she will either go away to bother somebody else or adopt a more amenable approach. From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Mon Dec 20 21:37:30 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 21:37:30 -0000 Subject: You're in the Army, now. wasFalse Alarm? Was:Re: Adults "failing" Harry (in tP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120218 > Pippin: > > As we know, the prophecy doesn't contain instructions for > destroying Harry, so if Dumbledore was letting Snape and Molly > think that it did, he would have very good reasons for not wanting > this information shared with Harry. It would also mean that > Snape need not know that Harry is the only one who can > vanquish Voldemort. He may not know the true contents of any of > the prophecy, even the first part. Neri: Oh dear, here is where you lose me again, Pippin. I just can't contain all these different versions in my poor brain all at once. Now let me try again. DD told the Order a lie that the prophecy contains instructions how to destroy Harry, so they won't tell Harry this lie, but Lupin and Sirius did know the truth and that's why they were exchanging glances, yet they didn't tell Harry the truth because they weren't supposed to know the truth, they were supposed to know the lie, but not tell it to Harry. Yet Sirius did want to tell Harry the truth but Molly objected, only she was objecting to telling Harry the lie, which she thought was the truth. Hey, I think I got it! Why didn't Sirius agree with Molly not to tell Harry the lie that she thought was the truth, and then went and told Harry the real truth? But wait a minute ? if Lupin is ESE he would have told Voldy the truth, so Voldy would have known the real prophecy and there was no need to go to the DoM, so Lupin couldn't have known the second half, so Sirius couldn't have told him, but Sirius would have told him if he knew so this must mean that Sirius didn't know it, so he must have believed DD's lie, so why were he and Lupin exchanging glances? Nope, lost it again... Neri From R.Vink2 at chello.nl Mon Dec 20 22:15:59 2004 From: R.Vink2 at chello.nl (Renee) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 22:15:59 -0000 Subject: One last try (re: Parenting Harry (was: Re: I don't like him much)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120219 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > >> Eloise: > > So a parent who is a bad parent, who is harsh or sadistic towards > their child is not, by definition, a parent? There are a lot of bad > parents around who treat their offspring far worse than Snape treats > Harry. > > Alla: > > I think that is beyond the point, actually. If there are parents who > treat their children worse and I know there are, it does not make > Snape to be the good one, IMO. > > If you determine Snape's function as "BAD PARENT", then I will > concede to that, but not just a parent, not to me. > > > > Eloise: > > My hypothesis was that Harry doesn't have a parent, therefore the > parenting roles are split between various people, not necessarily > done well, but done to some extent. > > Perhaps I'm wrong, then, and Harry isn't being parented at all. > > > Alla: > > It is not my place to decide whether you are wrong, but no, I don't > think Harry is being parented by Snape. > > Dumbledore, Minerva, Molly, Sirius, Lupin - all of those people I can > call Harry's parents, who screwed up badly at one point , but who had > Harry's best interests in mind and who (which I think parent should > have) love Harry. > > Sorry, but I don't think Snape can be called one. Renee: But none of these characters can be called a parent in the true sense of the word. None of them are to Harry what a real parent would have been, and what the Dursleys should have been but dismally failed to be. Parenthood is a many-faceted reality involving many different roles, not only at different stages of a child's developments but even at different moments of the day in different situations. One of these many aspects is disciplining the child if necessary. All parents (have to) do this occasionally. No child likes it, but sometimes parents just have to draw the line - and suffer the sometimes very vocal disapproval of their children, to put it mildly. Being unpleasant on occasion is part and parcel of parenthood. But if you isolate this aspect from the rest of the complex, you get a caricature of a parent, or even a monster. A kind of Snape. (And to make it worse, Snape fails in this disciplinary role because of his negative personal feelings towards Harry, but that is not what this is about.) And this is probably where the miscommunication arises, because here we're exchanging the level of the storyline, the history of what happened to one Harry Potter, for the level of the narrative and the techniques used to make the plot work and bring about the desired effects. In a previous post, Eloise called Snape a plot device - and this was the moment when it finally dawned on me. Snape has been given the ungrateful task of making disobedience and resistance on Harry's part possible. Harry *must* learn a modicum of discipline, or he won't be able to do what he has to do, but without the possibility of disobedience and rule-breaking, discipline has no meaning. Giving it meaning takes someone who has both the authority and the will to punish Harry for breaking the rules. Normally, a parent would play this role, but Harry has no parents. So Snape is cast in the role of disciplinarian. In a way, Snape *is* the `bad parent', disguised as a teacher - just as in many fairy-tales the `bad mother' (= every mother's necessary unpleasant side) is disguised as the evil stepmother. Renee From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Dec 20 22:31:56 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 22:31:56 -0000 Subject: One last try (re: Parenting Harry (was: Re: I don't like him much)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120220 > Renee: snip. One of these many aspects is disciplining the child if necessary. All parents (have to) do this occasionally. No child likes it, but sometimes parents just have to draw the line - and suffer the sometimes very vocal disapproval of their children, to put it mildly. Alla: Of course,Renee. I said it several times - I AGREE with this part, but to me the key word is "IF NECESSARY". I think that for the most part Snape punishes Harry when it is unnecessary. Renee: And this is probably where the miscommunication arises, because here we're exchanging the level of the storyline, the history of what happened to one Harry Potter, for the level of the narrative and the techniques used to make the plot work and bring about the desired effects. Alla: Could you clarify, please? Renee: snip. In a way, Snape *is* the `bad parent', disguised as a teacher - just as in many fairy-tales the `bad mother' (= every mother's necessary unpleasant side) is disguised as the evil stepmother. Alla: Sure, I have NO problem, calling Snape "bad parent" with the emphasis on "bad". This mixture of fairytale and more and more exploration of real issues is another problem we encounter in OOP analysis. From htfulcher at comcast.net Mon Dec 20 22:34:30 2004 From: htfulcher at comcast.net (marephraim) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 22:34:30 -0000 Subject: Behind that locked door Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120221 Hey Hello! The locked door can now be opened at jkrowling.com The only info I'll give is that you must click on the image of the Christmas tree in the mirror. ME :-D From khinterberg at yahoo.com Mon Dec 20 22:37:36 2004 From: khinterberg at yahoo.com (khinterberg) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 22:37:36 -0000 Subject: HBP release date Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120222 Sorry, I am most definitely off topic here, but the HBP release date will be announced in 24 hours or less, Happy Christmas everyone, and check out Jo's website! khinterberg From spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com Mon Dec 20 23:25:15 2004 From: spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com (dungrollin) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 23:25:15 -0000 Subject: Christmas cheer/having the last word Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120223 A little Christmas Pantomime, inspired by 'Theoretical boundaries' (120202 - and a number of others), taking to heart Kneasy's insinuation that we take ourselves too seriously. Though since I've been naughty and not gone through the back posts, it's undoubtedly been done before... Sorry, Kneasy. (By the way, do they do Christmas Pantomime in the States?) Poster #1: Snape might be a bastard, but he does save Harry's skin on a number of occasions. Poster #2: Snape may save Harry's skin on a number of occasions, but that doesn't excuse him being a bastard. Poster #1: But he *does* save Harry's skin on a number of occasions. Poster #2: But that *doesn't* excuse him being a bastard. Poster #1: I didn't *say* he wasn't a bastard, but he *does* save Harry's skin on a number of occasions. Poster #2: I didn't say he *didn't* save Harry's skin on a number of occasions, I just think that it *doesn't* excuse him being a bastard. Poster #1: I didn't say it *excuses* him being a bastard, I just said that he *does* save Harry's skin on occasion. Poster #2: Oh. From the position of that apostrophe, you seemed to be implying that Snape saving Harry's skin excuses him being a bastard. Poster #1: Well, actually, that apostrophe was there for a very good reason. I *do* think that just because Snape's a bastard doesn't mean that we should ignore the fact that he saves Harry's skin on a number of occasions. Poster #2: I'm sorry, I have to disagree. Just because Snape saves Harry's skin on a number of occasions, *doesn't* mean that we should ignore the fact that he's a bastard. Poster #1: I wasn't suggesting that we *should* ignore the fact that Snape's a bastard, I was just pointing out that he saves Harry's skin on a number of occasions. Poster #2: I'm *fully* aware of the fact that Snape saves Harry's skin on a number of occasions, but that *doesn't* make him any less of a bastard. Poster #1: I suspect that the reason we disagree about this is that we have a different definition of 'bastard'. Poster #2: Well dictionary.com defines a bastard as: "A person, especially one who is held to be *mean* or *disagreeable* [Middle English, from Old French, probably of Germanic origin; akin to Old Frisian b?st, marriage]". (emphasis mine) Poster #1: That's not what Chambers English Dictionary says: "a *difficult* or *unpleasant* person or thing [OF bastard (Fr b?tard) child of the pack-saddle (OFr bast)]". (emphasis mine) Poster #2: But *just because* he saves Harry's skin on a number of occasions doesn't mean you can cheerfully ignore the fact that he's *mean* and *disagreeable*. Poster #1: But *just because* he's *difficult* and *unpleasant*, doesn't mean that you can blithely overlook the fact that he *saves Harry's skin*. On a *number* of occasions. Poster #2: I didn't say he *hadn't* saved Harry's skin on a *number* of occasions... Cont'd p. 94. Merry Christmas/Bah humbug, Dungrollin From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Mon Dec 20 23:26:38 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 23:26:38 -0000 Subject: One last try (re: Parenting Harry (was: Re: I don't like him much)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120224 Alla wrote: "TO ME, being parent includes being FAIR (I mean warmth will be nice and I am one of those types), but FAIR is a necessary requirement and Snape is not fair, IMO at least." Del replies: Because of my past abuse (even though it wasn't coming from my mom), I became completely terrified of turning out a horrible and abusive mother, back when I was pregnant, and during the first months of my baby's life. So I studied all possible sources to discover what being a good parent meant. I read material from pediatricians, child psychologists, other parents, and also from my church. And, well, I must say that being fair was definitely not one of the main points that were emphasized by anyone. Being consistent was, being forgiving and charitable were recommended by many, but being fair wasn't high on anybody's list, for one obvious reason : it's often impossible. There are situations where it's possible, but there are also situations where a parent MUST be unfair. The parent is the parent, and the child is the child, and often this reality must be enforced on the child, even through unfair means if necessary. And this happens most often when the child must be punished : too often, it's not fair to punish a child, but it's necessary. When I punish my son because he's done something yet again even though I've told him three times already in the last half hour not to do it, it's not really fair, because he might have forgotten in the 10 minutes since last time, and also because he's not delibaretely trying to annoy me. But I *have* to punish him, or he's not going to learn not to do that thing, and worse he's not going to learn to obey me when I'm serious. Harry is much older than my son, but he's still a child, and Snape is an adult. That's why, for example, I still argue that Harry should show respect to Snape, even though Snape doesn't show respect to Harry. It's not fair, but Snape is an adult and Harry is a kid, so that's the way it should be IMO. Snape should in turn be punished by his own superior for not showing any respect to one of the students (*if* showing respect to the students is required of the teachers at Hogwarts), but whether Snape is indeed punished or not shouldn't have any influence on Harry's actions. That's not his business. So in short, I'll say that I disagree that a parent must be fair. Consistent, yes. Nice enough, yes. But fair, no, or at least not necessarily all the time. Alla wrote: "Sure, children rebel against parents, but when we as adults look at those rebellions, we can determine that parent was correct in doing such and such thing, in assigning such punishment, therefore from my adult POV parent was doing the job right." Del replies: The only problem is that there is no ONE definition of what doing a good parenting job means. The only basic definition pretty much everyone could agree on is that parenting includes making sure that the child will be able to fit in one way or another in society. But only terribly dysfunctional parents couldn't achieve that goal. Even the Dursleys are training Dudley to fit in society, even if their way is by using force and intimidation. I've seen tons of contradicting pieces of advice given concerning the parenting of *babies and toddlers*. I can't begin to imagine what I would have read if I had been looking into parenting teenagers... There isn't one perfect way of raising kids, and especially teenagers. Every parent must pick and choose his or her own way. Snape, as the archetypical child-less* disciplinarian, thinks strict discipline is the key to everything. That's one way of parenting. It has some good sides, and some (many) bad sides, but it's a valid way. It's not the way recommanded by most specialists, because most children under that rule don't take it too well, so it often leads to violent conflicts, but it's not an inherently evil way. Counter-productive in most cases, yes, but not evil or wrong. And it is definitely one type of parenting. *We don't know for sure that Snape ever had any kid, and he definitely doesn't seem to be closely parenting any kid of his at the moment. Alla wrote: "If you determine Snape's function as "BAD PARENT", then I will concede to that, but not just a parent, not to me." Del replies: I'm not sure Snape is a bad parent, because a bad parent is IMO one who isn't trying to do his job as a parent : make sure the kid will fit in society. And I think Snape *does* try to raise Harry in what he thinks is the right way to best fit into society now and later. Snape is a highly ineffective parent, for sure. But that doesn't make him a bad parent, because he's *trying* (unlike DD, for example, who is pretty much letting Harry grow up any way he likes). Alla wrote: "Dumbledore, Minerva, Molly, Sirius, Lupin - all of those people I can call Harry's parents, who screwed up badly at one point , but who had Harry's best interests in mind and who (which I think parent should have) love Harry. Sorry, but I don't think Snape can be called one." Del replies: But Snape *does* have *some* of Harry's best interests in mind. For example, judging from what he said in the Shrieking Shack, he seems to think that James got himself and Lily killed because he was so big-headed that he couldn't think straight anymore. As a consequence, he tries to prevent Harry from developing such a big head too, something he sees as an inevitable consequence of Harry's fame, his success at Quidditch, and the fact that DD is so lenient with him. Another example is his insistence that Harry follows the rules. He knows what dangers lurk around (he is, after all, a Dark Arts specialist), and he doesn't want Harry to run into them. Even as a teacher, he does have some of Harry's best interests in mind. He keeps giving him additional homework whenever he feels Harry hasn't learned a Potions lesson well enough, and he threatens to poison him in order to make sure that Harry will know his antidotes by heart. And honestly, I think that either all the adults that Harry comes into close interaction with can be called parental figures, or none of them can. The only exception is the one Harry himself identified : Sirius. Del From moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com Mon Dec 20 23:35:30 2004 From: moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com (K G) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 15:35:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Christmas cheer/having the last word In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041220233530.72215.qmail@web53510.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120225 dungrollin wrote: A little Christmas Pantomime, inspired by 'Theoretical boundaries' (120202 - and a number of others), taking to heart Kneasy's insinuation that we take ourselves too seriously. Though since I've been naughty and not gone through the back posts, it's undoubtedly been done before... Sorry, Kneasy. (By the way, do they do Christmas Pantomime in the States?) Poster #1: Snape might be a bastard, but he does save Harry's skin on a number of occasions. Poster #2: Snape may save Harry's skin on a number of occasions, but that doesn't excuse him being a bastard. (only because the list elves made me do it!!) Merry Christmas/Bah humbug, Dungrollin PERFECT!!!!!!!!!! gigglegigglegigglegigglegigglegigglegigglegigglegiggle and to answer your question.... never heard of a Christmas Pantomime!! But it sounds like a ton of fun!!! moonmyyst --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From bob.oliver at cox.net Tue Dec 21 00:05:27 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 00:05:27 -0000 Subject: No-choice parenting (was One last try) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120226 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: > > > And honestly, I think that either all the adults that Harry comes into > close interaction with can be called parental figures, or none of them > can. The only exception is the one Harry himself identified : Sirius. > > Del I think this is a very important statement. I really don't think any of the figures in Harry's life can be called "parental." And I don't think so for a very specific reason: Parenting (and especially single parenting) involves a large element of having no choice. That is, you don't get to pick and choose which aspects of your children's basic development you will be involved in. You don't get to say that I'll just deal with the discipline and not the emotions or I'll do the practical teaching but not the life skills, etc. You may want to do that. You may not be equally good at everything. But being a parent means... well, that you're stuck with the kid. You don't get to send them away or say, except under rather dire circumstances, "I can't deal with this." It's your lot in life to deal with your kid's life in all its messy glory. Maybe this is part of what underlies the saying that "Home is the place where they HAVE to let you in when you show up." Now, and this is VERY important -- I'm using the word "parent" in a normative sense, not a biological or social sense. Of course there are parents in the biological sense who aren't involved in their kid's lives. Of course not all people who are socially and legally recognized as parents of "X" live up to their responsibility. But that isn't what I'm talking about here. I'm talking about parenting in the sense of what *should* be emotionally and supportively. And I really don't think it makes much sense to approach it any other way in Harry's case, since he doesn't *have* parents in the biological or legal meaning of the term. I don't think that Harry really has a parental figure because he doesn't have anyone who has taken on this type of "no holds barred" commitment. In other words, I don't really think you can be parented by several people, each of whom fulfill a specific function. I think the functions of parenting have to be be condensed into one or two people, pretty much by definition. Snape disciplines Harry, yes. But I don't think it's appropriate to call him parental because of that. Lupin shows sympathy. But once again I don't think it's appropriate to call him a parental figure because of *that*. Truly parenting Harry would, I think, involve one of the characters saying that they *will* take on this type of commitment. That is, to say (figuratively), that they are going to make it their job in life to take care of Harry in, as far as possible, a full spectrum way. And to regard themselves as *having no choice* from that point on when it comes to taking care of Harry's needs because parents really don't. Lupinlore From bob.oliver at cox.net Tue Dec 21 00:20:01 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 00:20:01 -0000 Subject: One last try (re: Parenting Harry (was: Re: I don't like him much)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120227 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: > > > > Harry is much older than my son, but he's still a child, and Snape is > an adult. That's why, for example, I still argue that Harry should > show respect to Snape, even though Snape doesn't show respect to > Harry. It's not fair, but Snape is an adult and Harry is a kid, so > that's the way it should be IMO. Snape should in turn be punished by > his own superior for not showing any respect to one of the students > (*if* showing respect to the students is required of the teachers at > Hogwarts), but whether Snape is indeed punished or not shouldn't have > any influence on Harry's actions. That's not his business. > In an ideal world, yes, I would agree that it should work that way. But I'm afraid this just isnt'the way people are, kids or otherwise. You don't show respect to people who don't respect you, unless said respect is based on fear and then it really isn't respect, but obedience based on politics. As for it not being Harry's business whether Snape is punished or not, once again I agree in an ideal world it would work that way. But once again that just isn't the way people are. If people percieve that their superiors are not being held to reasonably just standards of conduct, it breeds cynicism and resistance, either passive or active. I've just in the past few months been involved (as an observer) in an enormous mess on a military base where it was perceived that officers and enlisted personnel were held to different standards of honesty. Now, one can certainly argue (the Universal Code of Military Justice in fact says) that enlisted personnel should respect their officers irregardless of how the military system deals with those officers. However, everyone involved, including the Judge Advocate, readily acknowledged that just isn't how life works, in the Air Force or anywhere else. In fact, the JA went so far as to say that the quickest way to utterly destroy discipline (as opposed to obedience based on the politics of self-interest) is to apply it unfairly and inconsistently across different levels. Lupinlore From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Tue Dec 21 00:35:26 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 00:35:26 -0000 Subject: One last try (re: Parenting Harry (was: Re: I don't like him much)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120228 Lupinlore wrote: "But I'm afraid this just isnt'the way people are, kids or otherwise. You don't show respect to people who don't respect you, unless said respect is based on fear and then it really isn't respect, but obedience based on politics." Del replies: Obedience based on politics sounds good enough for me, where a teacher-student relationship is concerned. I specifically didn't say that Harry should *have* any respect for Snape, because this is pretty hard, considering that he doesn't get any in return. But I still think that he should *show* due respect to a professor, no matter what. It is very much a political matter, but there's nothing wrong with that IMO. I personally do try to give respect where respect is due, no matter whether I get any respect in return or not, because I feel that I must do my part even if nobody else does. Lupinlore wrote: "As for it not being Harry's business whether Snape is punished or not, once again I agree in an ideal world it would work that way. But once again that just isn't the way people are. If people percieve that their superiors are not being held to reasonably just standards of conduct, it breeds cynicism and resistance, either passive or active." Del replies: I would agree, except that Harry should know by now that Snape is indeed being held to a similar standard : anytime Snape starts criticising Harry in front of DD, he gets rebuked. It's never loud or in-your-face, but it's very much on the same level as "*Professor* Snape, Harry". Del From bob.oliver at cox.net Tue Dec 21 00:45:55 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 00:45:55 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120229 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" > Where I start to get restive is when, for example a thread starts and > suddenly there's a load of posts castigating the Dursleys. Sure, they're > pompous, opinionated, ultra-conventional and don't treat Harry well. > For some that seems to be more than enough - they're nasty, possibly > evil and DD should have known better than to leave Harry in their not > so tender care. Full stop. Others may chime in and say it's not so bad > really, Harry is sane and healthy, if maybe under-fed. Rarely do > either camp dig deeper or consider the situation from the Dursleys > point of view. > Well, I understand where you are coming from. But then I ask, why are these books so popular, not just with kids, but with adults? The only thing I can really come up with is the themes and messages (the one implies the other) that are in the narrative. The popularity means that something about the HP themes resonate very deeply with people on a rather profound emotional level. Now, the fact is that people take messages and themes very seriously when they have been touched on that kind of deep emotional plane. Sure, the books as literature are fun and it's interesting to speculate about different POVs and possible theories. But I don't think all the people who read the books do so for that reason. Many read them because of their emotional connection with the characters and narrative. In other words, *because* of the relationship they sense between the themes/messages of the books and real life as they experience it. And therefore something like child abuse by the Dursleys, for instance, becomes deadly serious, because it *is* about real life as people *really* experience it. And the perception that abuse is being approved of, *in this narrative which touches them profoundly and thus relates to their real life in a very powerful way*, is an extremely important matter. > > > > > > Kneasy: > Too true. > One thing is notably different these days. > It seemed much more light-hearted, even frivolous. > More posters seem to take themselves much more seriously than > they did back then. Not an improvement IMO. Too much like Vernon. Once again, I think that if you approach the books as a fun piece of literature -- words on a page -- then being frivolous is easy. If you feel a deep emotional resonance with them, as I think many, many people do, then being frivolous or light is often out of the question. Lupinlore From saraandra at saraandra.plus.com Tue Dec 21 00:47:52 2004 From: saraandra at saraandra.plus.com (amanitamuscaria1) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 00:47:52 -0000 Subject: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 34, "The Department of Mysteries" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120230 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Abbi Dorn" wrote: > > 5) What happened to the thestrals after the group goes into the phone > booth? Do they have to be retrieved? AmanitaMuscaria now: I just assumed that, once they'd finished scavenging what was in the skip (large trashcan) and got bored waiting they would find their way home as they have a "'Mazin' sense o' direction". > > 6) Why doesn't the Ministry of Magic have an alarm go off when people enter > after business hours? What about security surrounding the Ministry? What > about their badges? Shouldn't some alarm go off when the badges were made > to say "Rescue Mission"? > > 7) What happened to the person in charge of weighing the visitors' wands? > > 8) Is the Ministry of Magic really deserted after business hours? What > about aurors? Shouldn't they work in shifts or be in and out of the > Ministry at odd hours? > > 9) Does the Ministry of Magic lack security on all levels? Could the > security have been removed by the Death Eaters? If so, what could have been > the security measures? > AmanitaMuscaria now: All these questions depend on what was posited some time ago - did Harry et al go to the actual Ministry, or maybe the actual Atrium, or was that a deception on Voldy's part? As the lift presumably wouldn't get much use in office hours, I would imagine it would get virtually no use outside of normal hours. So send the kids through a false Atrium, then return them to the Ministry on the ninth floor? They have to be at the phonebox, because the Thestrals are accurate in finding places, and they have to be on the ninth floor, as only Harry can pick up the orb. Where they are in between doesn't have to be real, and gets round those suspicious security lapses. > > 11) What is the mystery behind the veil? Where did the veil come from? If > the veil really is that dangerous, why not have the room locked? Who are > the voices? Do different people hear different voices when they are close > to the veil? > > 12) Why is Hermione not affected by the veil like Harry and the others? > She is almost hysterical when trying to pry Harry away from the veil. What > does she know or understand differently? AmanitaMuscaria now: Interesting, isn't it? JKR gives us Dementors, which she's said, IIRC, are her idea of depression personified. Now, I feel she's giving us the temptation of suicide. It isn't attractive to Hermione or Ron, because they've got a healthy sense of self-worth, but Harry, Neville, and Ginny all are fascinated. That's my current thought, anyways. > > 13) Why won't Sirius's knife open the door to the locked room? Is this the > "love" room Dumbledore speaks of later in the book? Why does Sirius's knife > melt? Can the blade be repaired? AmanitaMuscaria again: Harry needs to find a different 'key', I guess. I don't think that room can be opened by brute force, or anything but the correct approach. A revisit in the 7th book is my guess, as I doubt Harry will have the knowledge before then. > > 14) Seems there must be significance to the prophecy being in row 97, any > ideas? Could it be the year that the prophecy will come true? What about > row 53, is there significance that this was the first row seen by the group > upon entering the hall of prophecy. > AmanitaMuscaria again: It's got to mean something - JKR doesn't put things like that in for nothing... it's _almost_ pi cubed ... I don't think that's good enough. This chapter has so much in it. Cheers. AmanitaMuscaria From bob.oliver at cox.net Tue Dec 21 00:50:43 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 00:50:43 -0000 Subject: One last try (re: Parenting Harry (was: Re: I don't like him much)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120231 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: > > > Del replies: > I would agree, except that Harry should know by now that Snape is > indeed being held to a similar standard : anytime Snape starts > criticising Harry in front of DD, he gets rebuked. It's never loud or > in-your-face, but it's very much on the same level as "*Professor* > Snape, Harry". > > Del Chuckle. That raises a whole different set of issues about respect, now doesn't it? Should Harry respect Dumbledore (i.e. have respect for him?) At least in this one area, i.e. enforcing discipline on his faculty, it would seem very difficult to do. Lupinlore From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Tue Dec 21 01:01:30 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 01:01:30 -0000 Subject: Website Spoiler See it yourself First WAS (Re: Book 6 must be finished because) In-Reply-To: <200412150831381.SM01080@devbox> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120232 > > Valky: Assuming your recollection is absolutely accurate, and I do, of course, then the new wording 100% implies that an announcement that book six (HBP) is finished is no longer "not going to happen very soon".... or contrariwise the announcement is imminent!!!! And WILL appear on the Website. > Vivamus: > And the drum roll begins . . . ((Thu Dec 16, 2004 12:31 am)) TA -DA ........ Tuesday Dec 21st ..... Less than four days. from a Very very Happy Christmas-Cheery Valky!!! On another note what significance do you guys think the riddles have to HBP? The most interesting one, IMO, is the one about Ron, if that is at all significant, I want to know. The others fairly obviously relate to it, we all knew that the Otter was of some relevance. So what of C----- B--- ? :S Just a thought to share... From templar1112002 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 21 01:16:45 2004 From: templar1112002 at yahoo.com (templar1112002) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 01:16:45 -0000 Subject: Website Spoiler See it yourself First WAS (Re: Book 6 must be finished because) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120233 M.Clifford wrote: > TA -DA ........ Tuesday Dec 21st ..... Less than four days. > > from a Very very Happy Christmas-Cheery Valky!!! > > > On another note what significance do you guys think the riddles have > to HBP? The most interesting one, IMO, is the one about Ron, if that > is at all significant, I want to know. The others fairly obviously > relate to it, we all knew that the Otter was of some relevance. So > what of C----- B--- ? :S > Just a thought to share... *******Perhaps Ron's Patronus is a cow? LOL! Seriously now, I was indeed intrigued by the answers to the riddles, I got them all by myself, and it was chance that the first three that I had to solve were the three that reference to the title of book 6... when I got the next three riddles I didn't see the pattern anymore. Things that caught my attention about those last three: - Ron was connected to something he disliked. - Hermione was connected to something she felt happy/safe with. - Harry was connected to his past, being rescued by his first friend. Of course, it's hard to come to any ideas from those yet, but they certainly could be a hint on what is going to happen in book six: - Ron is not going to like something - Hermione is going to be happy - Harry will learn about his past I can be wrong, but this is what came up in my mind when trying to see the big picture. Any thoughts? Marcela From moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 21 01:23:24 2004 From: moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com (K G) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 17:23:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Website Spoiler See it yourself First WAS (Re: Book 6 must be finished because) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041221012324.5000.qmail@web53510.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120234 "M.Clifford" wrote: On another note what significance do you guys think the riddles have to HBP? The most interesting one, IMO, is the one about Ron, if that is at all significant, I want to know. The others fairly obviously relate to it, we all knew that the Otter was of some relevance. So what of C----- B--- ? :S Just a thought to share... Could C.B. be the initials of the HBP? Who do we know with those initials? I am drawing a blank right now. I also want to know how otters play into it. Also, anyone who is from or familiar with the Bristol area, do any of these words, letters or patterns ring any bells? moonmyyst --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Tue Dec 21 01:29:44 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 01:29:44 -0000 Subject: Website Spoiler See it yourself First WAS (Re: Book 6 must be finished because) In-Reply-To: <20041221012324.5000.qmail@web53510.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120235 > "M.Clifford" wrote: > > On another note what significance do you guys think the riddles have to HBP? The most interesting one, IMO, is the one about Ron, if that is at all significant, I want to know. The others fairly obviously relate to it, we all knew that the Otter was of some relevance. So what of C----- B--- ? :S > Just a thought to share... > > Could C.B. be the initials of the HBP? Who do we know with those initials? I am drawing a blank right now. I also want to know how otters play into it. Also, anyone who is from or familiar with the Bristol area, do any of these words, letters or patterns ring any bells? > > moonmyyst > > Valky: Darn, the mysteriously *missing* Caradoc Dearborn is CD not CB.... but I thought you were on to something. In Australia Bristol is a paint company, but thats probably useless trivia, OTOH I had given some thought to Bristol, some members in the past have drawn a trace line accross a map through Bristol to estimate where GH might be. Perhaps JKR is clueing us to look again at the map and placement of Bristol for clues to the HBP and the new location that Harry visits in chapter 2. Back to you moonymyst...... From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Tue Dec 21 01:39:52 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 01:39:52 -0000 Subject: Website Spoiler See it yourself First WAS (Re: Book 6 must be finished because) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120236 > M.Clifford wrote: > > On another note what significance do you guys think the riddles > have to HBP? The most interesting one, IMO, is the one about Ron, if that is at all significant, I want to know. The others fairly obviously relate to it, we all knew that the Otter was of some relevance. So what of C----- B--- ? :S > Marcela: > > *******Perhaps Ron's Patronus is a cow? LOL! > Valky Again: Lots of LOL. Dont rule it out, i reckon. ;D Marcela again: > Seriously now, I was indeed intrigued by the answers to the riddles, I got them all by myself, and it was chance that the first three that I had to solve were the three that reference to the title of book 6... when I got the next three riddles I didn't see the pattern anymore. Things that caught my attention about those last three: > > - Ron was connected to something he disliked. > - Hermione was connected to something she felt happy/safe with. > - Harry was connected to his past, being rescued by his first friend. > > Of course, it's hard to come to any ideas from those yet, but they > certainly could be a hint on what is going to happen in book six: > > - Ron is not going to like something > - Hermione is going to be happy > - Harry will learn about his past > Valky: THat makes a good deal of sense, I hope you're right about Harry learning about his past. I am looking forward to the final solution to the missing 24hrs. What is Ron not going to like, I wonder. Can it possibly be more than his usual quibbles with life and the hand he's been dealt? and so too Hermione, who is generally a content and happy young lady, is it a case of same old for these two or is there something entirely more important, going to happen? Just overanalysing as usual... Valky From moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 21 01:46:00 2004 From: moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com (K G) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 17:46:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Website Spoiler See it yourself First WAS (Re: Book 6 must be finished because) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041221014600.11750.qmail@web53510.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120237 Valky: Darn, the mysteriously *missing* Caradoc Dearborn is CD not CB.... but I thought you were on to something. In Australia Bristol is a paint company, but thats probably useless trivia, OTOH I had given some thought to Bristol, some members in the past have drawn a trace line accross a map through Bristol to estimate where GH might be. Perhaps JKR is clueing us to look again at the map and placement of Bristol for clues to the HBP and the new location that Harry visits in chapter 2. Back to you moonymyst...... Well, I just found a news story at Otterjoy.com that stated that the otters have recently returned to Bristol..... hhhmmmmm...... moonmyyst --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Send a seasonal email greeting and help others. Do good. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Tue Dec 21 01:48:08 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 01:48:08 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120238 Lupinlore wrote: "Once again, I think that if you approach the books as a fun piece of literature -- words on a page -- then being frivolous is easy. If you feel a deep emotional resonance with them, as I think many, many people do, then being frivolous or light is often out of the question." Del replies: One of the problems is that JKR changed the rules of the game halfway through the series. In SS/PS, the book that got me hooked, the Dursleys' abuse of Harry was *hilarious*. And the whole book wasn't very serious either. Sure there were a few unpleasantnesses happening once in a while, but overall the impression was one of fun and joke. I remember that we wre reading the book out loud in my English class at work, and we were very often doubled with laughter. Things got gradually darker with each book, but some things remained, like the fact that the Dursleys were nothing more than a bunch of ridiculous standing jokes. Sure they were abusing Harry every now and then, but the very way JKR was describing those attempts denied their seriousness. But now *everything* is serious, dark and somber, there aren't any jokes anywhere anymore, we're not allowed to take *anything* lightly anymore, even though we were encouraged, or even forced, to do so in previous books. That's quite a discrepancy. Del From templar1112002 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 21 01:49:52 2004 From: templar1112002 at yahoo.com (templar1112002) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 01:49:52 -0000 Subject: Website Spoiler See it yourself First WAS (Re: Book 6 must be finished because) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120239 > Marcela before: > > Seriously now, I was indeed intrigued by the answers to the > riddles, I got them all by myself, and it was chance that the first three that I had to solve were the three that reference to the title of book 6... when I got the next three riddles I didn't see the pattern anymore. Things that caught my attention about those last three: > > > > - Ron was connected to something he disliked. > > - Hermione was connected to something she felt happy/safe with. > > - Harry was connected to his past, being rescued by his first > friend. > > > > Of course, it's hard to come to any ideas from those yet, but they certainly could be a hint on what is going to happen in book six: > > > > - Ron is not going to like something > > - Hermione is going to be happy > > - Harry will learn about his past > > > > > Valky: > THat makes a good deal of sense, I hope you're right about Harry > learning about his past. I am looking forward to the final solution > to the missing 24hrs. What is Ron not going to like, I wonder. Can > it possibly be more than his usual quibbles with life and the hand > he's been dealt? and so too Hermione, who is generally a content and > happy young lady, is it a case of same old for these two or is there > something entirely more important, going to happen? > > Just overanalysing as usual... ******Marcela now: The question regarding Hermione's Patronus might also point to her needing to produce one in HBP. Scary thought... Marcela From siskiou at vcem.com Tue Dec 21 02:05:09 2004 From: siskiou at vcem.com (Susanne) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 18:05:09 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Website Spoiler See it yourself First WAS (Re: Book 6 must be finished because) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <891967831.20041220180509@vcem.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120240 Hi, Monday, December 20, 2004, 5:49:52 PM, templar1112002 wrote: > ******Marcela now: The question regarding Hermione's Patronus might > also point to her needing to produce one in HBP. Scary thought... Well, truthfully, I'd be very surprised if she (and others) didn't need this skill sooner or later ;) As to the predictions of Ron not liking something, Harry learning about the past(not sure about the interpretation of this question and the one for Hermione) and Hermione being happy: they are very, very general. You could find all of these in any of the previous books. Unless you meant that these things will be the main themes each of the three will have to deal with. But even then, I really doubt the questions were major hints for the content of book 6. :) -- Best regards, Susanne mailto:siskiou at vcem.com From wulfkub at wulfkub.com Tue Dec 21 02:16:37 2004 From: wulfkub at wulfkub.com (Amanda) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 21:16:37 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Website Spoiler See it yourself First WAS (Re: Book 6 must be finished because) References: Message-ID: <002d01c4e703$1c19fd80$0402a8c0@carolina.rr.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120241 Ok, I am stupid. I admit it. Can someone email me with a hint on the fourth riddle? The one about the thing that goes on after the death of the creator? Thanks for your help and please reply OL. Kethryn From moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 21 02:17:05 2004 From: moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com (K G) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 18:17:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Website Spoiler See it yourself First WAS (Re: Book 6 must be finished because) In-Reply-To: <20041221014600.11750.qmail@web53510.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041221021705.20705.qmail@web53510.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120242 K G wrote: Valky: Darn, the mysteriously *missing* Caradoc Dearborn is CD not CB.... but I thought you were on to something. In Australia Bristol is a paint company, but thats probably useless trivia, OTOH I had given some thought to Bristol, some members in the past have drawn a trace line accross a map through Bristol to estimate where GH might be. Perhaps JKR is clueing us to look again at the map and placement of Bristol for clues to the HBP and the new location that Harry visits in chapter 2. Back to you moonymyst...... Well, I just found a news story at Otterjoy.com that stated that the otters have recently returned to Bristol..... hhhmmmmm...... moonmyyst when looking at a travel site on Bristol, I found something with C.B.......... Clifton Bridge. Okay, ya'll from over there.... any thing clicking yet? moonmyyst --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Send a seasonal email greeting and help others. Do good. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From bob.oliver at cox.net Tue Dec 21 02:18:27 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 02:18:27 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120243 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: > > Del replies: > One of the problems is that JKR changed the rules of the game halfway > through the series. > I agree that the change of tone in OOTP is extremely problematic. Themes and events that are perfectly acceptable in a fairy tale such as PS/SS take on an entirely different weight when measured against the darker, more "realistic" tone of OOTP. The comic Dursleys become very real child abusers; the mysterious and wise Dumbledore becomes a callous manipulator who isn't free from tacit consent to abuse himself; etc. Oddly enough, the only one who managed to make it through the transition with his cartoon personality and relevance intact was Voldemort. Go figure. Lupinlore From templar1112002 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 21 02:20:08 2004 From: templar1112002 at yahoo.com (templar1112002) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 02:20:08 -0000 Subject: Website Spoiler See it yourself First WAS (Re: Book 6 must be finished because) In-Reply-To: <002d01c4e703$1c19fd80$0402a8c0@carolina.rr.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120244 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Amanda" wrote: > Ok, I am stupid. I admit it. Can someone email me with a hint on the > fourth riddle? The one about the thing that goes on after the death of the > creator? > > Thanks for your help and please reply OL. > > Kethryn SPOILER answer to that riddle: prince From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 21 02:21:16 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 02:21:16 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120245 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lupinlore" wrote: Well, I understand where you are coming from. But then I ask, why are these books so popular, not just with kids, but with adults? The only thing I can really come up with is the themes and messages (the one implies the other) that are in the narrative. The popularity means that something about the HP themes resonate very deeply with people on a rather profound emotional level. Now, the fact is that people take messages and themes very seriously when they have been touched on that kind of deep emotional plane. Sure, the books as literature are fun and it's interesting to speculate about different POVs and possible theories. But I don't think all the people who read the books do so for that reason. Many read them because of their emotional connection with the characters and narrative. In other words, *because* of the relationship they sense between the themes/messages of the books and real life as they experience it. And therefore something like child abuse by the Dursleys, for instance, becomes deadly serious, because it *is* about real life as people *really* experience it. And the perception that abuse is being approved of, *in this narrative which touches them profoundly and thus relates to their real life in a very powerful way*, is an extremely important matter. Alla: Yep, absolutely. This is exactly how I feel. These books touch something within my soul that not many of the books I read before touched. I am still trying to understand this phenomena, because I read and continue to read A LOT of the books, other than adventures of Mr.Potter. I grew up reading and studying russian clasical literature. I would NEVER consider Rowling to be the same quality writer as I consider .... let's say Tolstoy to be, but at the same time, none of the books by that writer resonates with me as deeply as some of the characters of the "potterverse" do. Wierd? Yes, you bet. I, who NEVER was obsessive fan of any book or musical group, became an obsessive fan of the children's series. Oh, well. There are worse things to obsess about, me thinks. Yes, I DO have fun when I talk about the books, but some of these issues are indeed serious and as long as we are talking about the issues and not making judgments about fellow posters based on what they like and dislike in the books, I think we will be fine. From wulfkub at wulfkub.com Tue Dec 21 02:26:51 2004 From: wulfkub at wulfkub.com (Amanda) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 21:26:51 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Website Spoiler See it yourself First WAS (Re: Book 6 must be finished because) References: Message-ID: <004101c4e704$8a932100$0402a8c0@carolina.rr.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120246 > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Amanda" wrote: > > Ok, I am stupid. I admit it. Can someone email me with a hint on > the > > fourth riddle? The one about the thing that goes on after the > death of the > > creator? > > > > Thanks for your help and please reply OL. > > > > Kethryn > > Ok, DUH. I can't type, obviously because I know I tried that. But it worked now, thanks for the assist. Kethryn From moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 21 02:25:14 2004 From: moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com (K G) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 18:25:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Website Spoiler See it yourself First WAS (Re: Book 6 must be finished because) In-Reply-To: <891967831.20041220180509@vcem.com> Message-ID: <20041221022515.90717.qmail@web53502.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120247 Susanne wrote: Unless you meant that these things will be the main themes each of the three will have to deal with. But even then, I really doubt the questions were major hints for the content of book 6. :) -- Best regards, Susanne mailto:siskiou at vcem.com Maybe, but isn't it nice to have something new to talk about? I don't know about you guys but I am going to find it hard to sleep tonight!! I just found out that one of my other favorite authors has recently posted the release date of book 11 in his series... and I have been waiting for this one much longer!!!! This is going to be a great reading year for me!!! moonmyyst __________________________________________________ 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 dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 21 02:25:23 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 02:25:23 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120248 Del replies: One of the problems is that JKR changed the rules of the game halfway through the series. > Lupinlore: I agree that the change of tone in OOTP is extremely problematic. Themes and events that are perfectly acceptable in a fairy tale such as PS/SS take on an entirely different weight when measured against the darker, more "realistic" tone of OOTP. The comic Dursleys become very real child abusers; the mysterious and wise Dumbledore becomes a callous manipulator who isn't free from tacit consent to abuse himself; etc. Oddly enough, the only one who managed to make it through the transition with his cartoon personality and relevance intact was Voldemort. Go figure. Alla: There was a paper presentation done during convention Alley, which debated exactly that topic - juggling between Cinderella plot and morally flawed hero, who is closer to reality plot. (I don't remember that exact words) Yes, it is possible to look at it this way, but one of the audience said very wise thing - maybe there is no juggling at all, but Harry simply grows up and starts seeing people around him in the darker colours and acquires some grey colours himself. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 21 02:34:08 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 02:34:08 -0000 Subject: No-choice parenting (was One last try) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120249 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lupinlore" wrote: I don't think that Harry really has a parental figure because he doesn't have anyone who has taken on this type of "no holds barred" commitment. In other words, I don't really think you can be parented by several people, each of whom fulfill a specific function. I think the functions of parenting have to be be condensed into one or two people, pretty much by definition. Alla: Oh, if you put it this way, then yes, I agree. Parenting can not really be divided to several people and Harry did not have person in his life who would take care of his needs 24/7. But we were discussing "parenting" of Harry in more metaphorical way and in this way, I think we can say that different parts of Harry's parenting were indeed performed by different people. Regardless, I agree, this is not realy parenting . I wish Harry would have someone who will step up in HBP and help him in more real way. From stevejjen at earthlink.net Tue Dec 21 02:35:24 2004 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 02:35:24 -0000 Subject: First Riddle on JKR's website (Website Spoiler See it yourself First ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120250 Valky: > On another note what significance do you guys think the riddles have > to HBP? The most interesting one, IMO, is the one about Ron, if that > is at all significant, I want to know. The others fairly obviously > relate to it, we all knew that the Otter was of some relevance. So > what of C----- B--- ? :S > Just a thought to share... Jen: I think the first riddle holds promise because it can be read several different ways. Here's the riddle (without the answer) after some spoiler space: * * * * * * * * * * * * * * "I cannot be other than what I am Until the man who made me dies Power and glory will fall to me, finally Only when he last closes his eyes." My first read-through, I didn't think of this literally. I thought of Dumbledore saying Kreacher is who he is because wizards 'made him that way'. Someone who was 'fashioned' by another being, so to speak. Then when I got the answer was Prince, well, it made me wonder if the HBP is somehow in bondage to another person and is waiting for his death. Or, if one of the characters is bewitched by a spell that can only end upon the death of someone. First I wondered since Sirius died, that could possibly release Kreacher to be the HBP. Not that he was made who he is by Sirius per se, but by the Black lineage. But I doubt Kreacher will find any glory, unless it's with Voldemort, since he betrayed the Order. *Then* I wondered about Lupin. Maybe there was more to his becoming a werewolf than we know. He said he was foolish and got bitten, but given his self-deprecating way, did it only appear to happen that way and he's actually ensnared by a spell that will only end upon someone's death? Any other thoughts? Jen From bob.oliver at cox.net Tue Dec 21 02:41:46 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 02:41:46 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120251 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" > Yes, it is possible to look at it this way, but one of the audience > said very wise thing - maybe there is no juggling at all, but Harry > simply grows up and starts seeing people around him in the darker > colours and acquires some grey colours himself. Oh, I think that is perfectly plausible, although Harry seems to have grown up in an awfully big spurt. The point, however, isn't whether it's plausible or not, IMO. I think much (but certainly not all) of the controversy that came out of OOTP has to do with the implications of the themes, whatever frame of narrative development you place them in. Lupinlore From moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 21 02:44:26 2004 From: moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com (K G) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 18:44:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] First Riddle on JKR's website (Website Spoiler See it yourself First ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041221024426.28613.qmail@web53510.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120252 Jen Reese wrote: Jen: I think the first riddle holds promise because it can be read several different ways. Here's the riddle (without the answer) after some spoiler space: * * * * * * * * * * * * * * "I cannot be other than what I am Until the man who made me dies Power and glory will fall to me, finally Only when he last closes his eyes." My first read-through, I didn't think of this literally. I thought of Dumbledore saying Kreacher is who he is because wizards 'made him that way'. Someone who was 'fashioned' by another being, so to speak. Then when I got the answer was Prince, well, it made me wonder if the HBP is somehow in bondage to another person and is waiting for his death. Or, if one of the characters is bewitched by a spell that can only end upon the death of someone. First I wondered since Sirius died, that could possibly release Kreacher to be the HBP. Not that he was made who he is by Sirius per se, but by the Black lineage. But I doubt Kreacher will find any glory, unless it's with Voldemort, since he betrayed the Order. *Then* I wondered about Lupin. Maybe there was more to his becoming a werewolf than we know. He said he was foolish and got bitten, but given his self-deprecating way, did it only appear to happen that way and he's actually ensnared by a spell that will only end upon someone's death? Any other thoughts? Jen My first riddle was about Hermione. This one was my 5th riddle. Another thought occured to me. If the Prince can only become something more if the one who made him dies, then that would lead me to believe there is a king of some variety out there. Who can we see that would be a king? If this riddle holds true, then the person has not died yet or the prince would become the king. Lets list all the kings that we know of in the books. moonmyyst --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? All your favorites on one personal page ? Try My Yahoo! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 21 02:47:45 2004 From: moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com (K G) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 18:47:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Theoretical boundaries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041221024745.97259.qmail@web53502.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120253 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" > Yes, it is possible to look at it this way, but one of the audience > said very wise thing - maybe there is no juggling at all, but Harry > simply grows up and starts seeing people around him in the darker > colours and acquires some grey colours himself. Oh, I think that is perfectly plausible, although Harry seems to have grown up in an awfully big spurt. Lupinlore IMO, the events in the graveyard were enough to make ANYONE grow up rather quickly. I found OOTP to be a very ...uncomfortable... book. But then, I felt the same way about that period in my life. (but then, as my son reminds me, the dinosaurs could have had a hand in that!!) moonmyyst __________________________________________________ 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 dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 21 02:49:01 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 02:49:01 -0000 Subject: One last try (re: Parenting Harry (was: Re: I don't like him much)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120254 > Del replies: snip. Being consistent was, being forgiving and charitable were recommended by many, but being fair wasn't high on anybody's list, for one obvious reason : it's often impossible. There are situations where it's possible, but there are also situations where a parent MUST be unfair. The parent is the parent, and the child is the child, and often this reality must be enforced on the child, even through unfair means if necessary. And this happens most often when the child must be punished : too often, it's not fair to punish a child, but it's necessary. When I punish my son because he's done something yet again even though I've told him three times already in the last half hour not to do it, it's not really fair, because he might have forgotten in the 10 minutes since last time, and also because he's not delibaretely trying to annoy me. But I *have* to punish him, or he's not going to learn not to do that thing, and worse he's not going to learn to obey me when I'm serious. Alla: OK, I think I have an example of what kind of fairness parent should have. I think (and this is of course just my guess :o) that when your boy will grow up, he will PERFECTLY understand why you had to punish him. For him looking back at his life as an adult, he will understand the fairness of your actions (and yes, of course we all screw up SOMETIMES). I just remembered one of Snape related examples. I think that happened in PS/SS, or maybe not. This was not such a serious offense in comparison to his many wrongdoings (in my book), but still a good example, IMO. Do you remember when Harry with Ron and Hermione were outside and Harry was reading the book and Snape came up to them and took points from Harry for reading the book outside? Ummm, what rule was Harry breaking at that moment? Do you think that if adult Harry will look back, he will think that Snape's attitude were in any shape or form fair to him? Oh and of course another thing - this question could sound as rhetorical, but it is not really. Do you agree that parent has to LOVE the child? I am not talking about constantly show warm,fuzzy feelings, but just letting the child know that he/she is loved? Do you think that Snape LOVES Harry? From snow15145 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 21 02:59:17 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 02:59:17 -0000 Subject: Website Spoiler See it yourself First WAS (Re: Book 6 must be finished because) In-Reply-To: <20041221021705.20705.qmail@web53510.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120255 Valky: Darn, the mysteriously *missing* Caradoc Dearborn is CD not CB.... but I thought you were on to something. In Australia Bristol is a paint company, but thats probably useless trivia, OTOH I had given some thought to Bristol, some members in the past have drawn a trace line accross a map through Bristol to estimate where GH might be. Perhaps JKR is clueing us to look again at the map and placement of Bristol for clues to the HBP and the new location that Harry visits in chapter 2. moonmyyst: when looking at a travel site on Bristol, I found something with C.B.......... Clifton Bridge. Snow: Strange that you should mention bridge this is what I found looking for the Old English definition for Bristol: Bristol ~ Old English 'Brycgstow'. Bridge and meeting place, also the place of the bridge. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 21 03:00:14 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 03:00:14 -0000 Subject: First Riddle on JKR's website (Website Spoiler See it yourself First ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120256 Jen: I think the first riddle holds promise because it can be read several different ways. Here's the riddle (without the answer) after some spoiler space: >* > * > * > * > * > * > * > * > > "I cannot be other than what I am > Until the man who made me dies > Power and glory will fall to me, finally > Only when he last closes his eyes." snip. *Then* I wondered about Lupin. Maybe there was more to his becoming a werewolf than we know. He said he was foolish and got bitten, but given his self-deprecating way, did it only appear to happen that way and he's actually ensnared by a spell that will only end upon someone's death? Any other thoughts? Alla: Heee! I also thought about Remus. Maybe he can assume his royal duties only after the person who bite him will die and accordingly he will be free. :o) Maybe this person was his father. I wish... I think I read too many fanfiction stories. :o) From moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 21 03:11:53 2004 From: moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com (K G) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 19:11:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Website Spoiler See it yourself First WAS (Re: Book 6 must be finished because) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041221031153.5031.qmail@web53502.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120257 Valky: OTOH I had given some thought to Bristol, some members in the past have drawn a trace line accross a map through Bristol to estimate where GH might be. Perhaps JKR is clueing us to look again at the map and placement of Bristol for clues to the HBP and the new location that Harry visits in chapter 2. moonmyyst: when looking at a travel site on Bristol, I found something with C.B.......... Clifton Bridge. Snow: Strange that you should mention bridge?this is what I found looking for the Old English definition for Bristol: Bristol ~ Old English 'Brycgstow'. Bridge and meeting place, also the place of the bridge. Okay 1) Harry is going to go somewhere in chapter 2 2) Bristol was mentioned in SS/PS and again we were reminded of it in the clues 3) One of the clues had the initials C.B. in it. 4) In Bristol there is a bridge that has those initials 5) In old English, Bristol means bridge and meeting place 6) Another clue mentions Otters 7) Otters, JKR's favorite animal, has recently returned to Bristol either we are on to something or else this is one of the biggest red herrings yet!! moonmyyst (who still thinks the HBP in an otter that lives in Bristol and who eats corned beef) __________________________________________________ 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 dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 21 03:28:12 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 03:28:12 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120258 - Alla: Yes, it is possible to look at it this way, but one of the audience said very wise thing - maybe there is no juggling at all, but Harry simply grows up and starts seeing people around him in the darker colours and acquires some grey colours himself. Lupinlore: Oh, I think that is perfectly plausible, although Harry seems to have grown up in an awfully big spurt. Alla: LOL! Lupinlore: The point, however, isn't whether it's plausible or not, IMO. I think much (but certainly not all) of the controversy that came out of OOTP has to do with the implications of the themes, whatever frame of narrative development you place them in. Alla: Well, even those themes of abuse, etc, I would say have a lot to do with Harry's growing up and noticing that WW is not such happy place (Duh, Harry ;o)) as he may have thought. Of course for miserable child who spent ten years of his life in the cupboard, WW sounded as great escape. Fifteen year old, who fought the most evil lord of all times (I definitely agree with K.G. that Graveyard alone will make anybody grew up and fast), notices a lot more. I remember that one of the first OOP reviews was talking about symbolic meaning of "dissilusionment" charm - as Harry opening his eyes and seeing a lot of unpleasant things going on around him. I happen to agree with such POV. From dontask2much at yahoo.com Tue Dec 21 03:31:45 2004 From: dontask2much at yahoo.com (charme) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 22:31:45 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Website Spoiler See it yourself First WAS (Re: Book 6 must be finished because) References: <20041221031153.5031.qmail@web53502.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <005e01c4e70d$99718000$6701a8c0@MITRE.ORG> No: HPFGUIDX 120259 Valky: OTOH I had given some thought to Bristol, some members in the past have drawn a trace line accross a map through Bristol to estimate where GH might be. Perhaps JKR is clueing us to look again at the map and placement of Bristol for clues to the HBP and the new location that Harry visits in chapter 2. moonmyyst: when looking at a travel site on Bristol, I found something with C.B.......... Clifton Bridge. Snow: Strange that you should mention bridge.this is what I found looking for the Old English definition for Bristol: Bristol ~ Old English 'Brycgstow'. Bridge and meeting place, also the place of the bridge. KG: Okay 1) Harry is going to go somewhere in chapter 2 2) Bristol was mentioned in SS/PS and again we were reminded of it in the clues 3) One of the clues had the initials C.B. in it. 4) In Bristol there is a bridge that has those initials 5) In old English, Bristol means bridge and meeting place 6) Another clue mentions Otters Charme: The bridge is also of an Egyptian design, and apparently corrected during construction so it would appear "true": in another would, it would appear level . The piers were originally supposed to have sphinxs mounted at the top of them, but I think I read the cost of doing so at that time was extravagant and they were never constructed. 7) Otters, JKR's favorite animal, has recently returned to Bristol either we are on to something or else this is one of the biggest red herrings yet!! moonmyyst (who still thinks the HBP in an otter that lives in Bristol and who eats corned beef) __________________________________________________ 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] 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 From moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 21 03:37:06 2004 From: moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com (K G) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 19:37:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Website Spoiler See it yourself First WAS (Re: Book 6 must be finished because) In-Reply-To: <005e01c4e70d$99718000$6701a8c0@MITRE.ORG> Message-ID: <20041221033706.55330.qmail@web53507.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120260 charme wrote: Charme: The bridge is also of an Egyptian design, and apparently corrected during construction so it would appear "true": in another would, it would appear level . The piers were originally supposed to have sphinxs mounted at the top of them, but I think I read the cost of doing so at that time was extravagant and they were never constructed. You know, now that you mention it, Egypt has been becoming a reoccuring theme. This would tie into that nicely. Sphinxs were supposed to be on them? Very fitting after seeing the one in GoF in the maze. moonmyyst __________________________________________________ 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 mwsteigers at yahoo.com Mon Dec 20 20:58:16 2004 From: mwsteigers at yahoo.com (marcq steigers) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 12:58:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 34, "The Department of Mysteries" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041220205817.36266.qmail@web53206.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120261 Abbi Dorn wrote: 5) What happened to the thestrals after the group goes into the phone booth? Do they have to be retrieved? Steigs: I doubt the children knew the exact route to the department. The thestrals must have known that's where the group wanted to go and took them there. If the thestrals are intelligent enough to get there, I'm sure they know the way back. Like a horse or a dog, they probably just returned 'home'. Or they could just wait around like a taxi, I doubt muggles can see them whether or not they have experienced death. I really don't think taking the thestrals was as stupid as flying a car over London as far as muggle sightings go. If you saw a group of kids flying through the air, you'd probably check yourself into a loony bin, but if you saw a car... that's a little different. Plus, it was under the cover of night. If their robes were dark they would have been very hard to spot. Who looks up at the sky for flying children anyway? Steigs From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 21 03:52:58 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 03:52:58 -0000 Subject: Can Occlumency be taught ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120262 Alla wrote previously: > "This way of teaching smells TO ME of Voldemort's way of teaching and I hope that occlumency can be taught." > > Del replied : > Well, we still don't know WHO taught Occlumency to Snape, if anyone > did. It might very well have been LV. > > And if Occlumency can be taught, my problem becomes : why isn't it > taught to everyone? Or at least to everyone in the Order? But then, > maybe it is? > Carol responds: First, regarading a poing made up thread about Occlumency possibly being dark Magic: I'm almost certain that it is not since it protects the Occlumens against intrusion into his own mind. Like Protego and whatever Harry instinctively does to protect himself against the Imperius Curse, Occlumency is DADA, not DA itself. It hurts no one; at most it might protect a Death Eater who knew it against an auror or judge who tried to use Legilimency on him. Almost certainly Snape uses it to protect his true memories and feelings from detection by Voldemort, which would be useless if Voldemort taught it to him. Nor would Voldemort, who doesn't trust his Death Eaters any more than he trusts anyone else, be likely to teach them a skill that would protect them against his Legilimency. For all these reasons I think that 1) Occlumency is not dark Magic. 2) Dumbledore taught it to Snape. 3) Snape used the only methods he knew, those that Dumbledore used on him, to teach Harry. 4) The Occlumency lessons didn't wholly fail; Harry probably knew enough to block the dreams if he had chosen to do so. 5) To the extent that it did fail, it was for reasons that had nothing to do with Snape's teaching methods (mutual animosity, Harry's mental state, Harry's desire to continue his dream). Carol, with apologies for having been kept away from the list by Christmas preparations and other real-life obligations From norek_archives2 at hotmail.com Tue Dec 21 03:56:48 2004 From: norek_archives2 at hotmail.com (Janet Anderson) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 03:56:48 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: ADMIN: Rudeness and Insults, again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120263 Geoff said: >Looking at it within the context of HPFGU and also of another Usenet >group to which I belong, some of it has been "trolling", making >controversial and confrontational statements in order to provoke a >flame war. My Usenet group has adopted the catchphrase "Please don't >feed the trolls", i.e. in such a situation, do not reply. If the >instigator of such mischief is ignored, then hopefully he or she will >either go away to bother somebody else or adopt a more amenable >approach. You know, that's what I thought too, and I solved the problem by using my "Block Sender" option. I'm surprised more people didn't think of such a simple solution. Janet Anderson From norek_archives2 at hotmail.com Tue Dec 21 04:05:06 2004 From: norek_archives2 at hotmail.com (Janet Anderson) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 04:05:06 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 34, "The Department of Mysteries" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120264 >1) Thestrals obviously understand human language since they were able to >understand Harry's instructions. Why is that? Can most magical >animal/beasts/beings understand the human language? Buckbeak clearly understands human language even though he can't speak. The mer-people in the lake understand human language although they don't seem able to speak it, but only their own language. If Grawp is an example, giants don't understand human language unless they are taught -- but according to Hagrid, he and Madame Maxime have no problem communicating with the giants even though Hagrid, at least, has been raised entirely as a human. >4) When riding the Thestrals to the Ministry of Magic, could the riders be >seen? Can only people who see thestrals normally be able to see the riders >during flight? Could they see each other during the flight? (I am not at home so I can't look it up.) >7) What happened to the person in charge of weighing the visitors wands? > >8) Is the Ministry of Magic really deserted after business hours? What >about aurors? Shouldn't they work in shifts or be in and out of the >Ministry at odd hours? In my opinion, these are the questions which the rescuers should have asked themselves shortly after their arrival. Had they done so, they might have at least suspected that something was not right. >17) Why was the orb/prophecy warm? Why were some of the orbs as dull and >dark as blown out light bulbs while others glowed? I don't know, but my theory is that the warm, glowing prophecies are those which are still in the process of being fulfilled, while the dark, dull ones have already been fulfilled. Janet Anderson From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Dec 21 04:10:03 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 04:10:03 -0000 Subject: You're in the Army, now. wasFalse Alarm? Was:Re: Adults "failing" Harry (in tP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120265 > > Pippin: > > > > As we know, the prophecy doesn't contain instructions for destroying Harry, so if Dumbledore was letting Snape and Molly think that it did, he would have very good reasons for not wanting this information shared with Harry. It would also mean that Snape need not know that Harry is the only one who can vanquish Voldemort. He may not know the true contents of any of the prophecy, even the first part.< > > Neri: > Oh dear, here is where you lose me again, Pippin. I just can't contain all these different versions in my poor brain all at once. Now let me try again. DD told the Order a lie that the prophecy contains instructions how to destroy Harry, so they won't tell Harry this lie, but Lupin and Sirius did know the truth and that's why they were exchanging glances, yet they didn't tell Harry the truth because they weren't supposed to know the truth, they were supposed to know the lie, but not tell it to Harry. Yet Sirius did want to tell Harry the truth but Molly objected, only she was objecting to telling Harry the lie, which she thought was the truth. Hey, I think I got it! Why didn't Sirius agree with Molly not to tell Harry the lie that she thought was the truth, and then went and told Harry the real truth?< Pippin: He might have, but as you'll notice, it's Lupin who tells Sirius they've said enough. He says there are dangers they've no idea of, any of them. Wonder what that means? Neri: > But wait a minute ? if Lupin is ESE he would have told Voldy the truth, so Voldy would have known the real prophecy and there was no need to go to the DoM... Pippin: Voldemort does act as if he knows only he can kill Harry, doesn't he?Let's suppose ESE!Lupin reports the true prophecy, having heard it from Sirius.Voldemort is still going to want to hear the prophecy for himself. What if Sirius is misinformed? What if Lupin is playing games of his own? ESE!Lupin may also report that only Voldemort or Harry can take the prophecy from the shelf. Voldemort is also still going to want independent confirmation that only he or Harry can take it, for the same reasons. Voldemort also has to behave as if he isn't getting secret information from ESE!Lupin, because to do otherwise would be to compromise his spy. So Voldemort organizes a couple of phony attempts to seize the prophecy, then rescues Rookwood from Azkaban and stages his little set piece about how woefully misinformed he's been. Pippin whose original EverSoEvil!Lupin post is 39362 From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Mon Dec 20 23:37:26 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 15:37:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 34, "The Department of Mysteries" Message-ID: <20041220233726.21580.qmail@web53102.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120266 Abbi Dorn wrote: > 1) Thestrals obviously understand human language > since they were able to > understand Harry's instructions. Why is that? Can > most magical > animal/beasts/beings understand the human language? Maybe they are like dogs, you can call him and he'll come, you can say 'sit' and he'll sit. Of course thestrals seem a little beyond that, they understand a bit more. > 2) Why didn't Harry and Neville help Ron, Hermione, > and Ginny onto the thestrals? He must have forgotten that they couldn't see them. > 3) Why was Luna acting as if she had ridden a > thestral before? Is it from > her natural demeanor or could she have previous > experience riding a thestral? Who knows? Luna is kinda weird. Maybe she has ridden them before, or she just knows how to ride a regular horse so a fleshless horse wouldn't make a big difference. > 4) When riding the Thestrals to the Ministry of > Magic, could the riders be > seen? Can only people who see thestrals normally be > able to see the riders during flight? My guess is yes, but it's nighttime and they all wear dark robes so maybe they won't be seen. Imagine a poor muggle looking up and seeing a boy riding an invisible flying horse. > 5) What happened to the thestrals after the group > goes into the phone > booth? Do they have to be retrieved? They must have gone back to Hogwarts. > 6) Why doesn't the Ministry of Magic have an alarm > go off when people enter > after business hours? What about security > surrounding the Ministry? What > about their badges? Shouldnt some alarm go off > when the badges were made to say "Rescue Mission"? The phone booth is just a machine whose job is to get names and purpose of the visit, that's all. My guess is Lucius & Co. must have cleared the way for Harry. They must have killed or stupefied Eric the security guard and any other employee on their way. This makes me wonder, didn't an Order Member guard the prophesy day and night? Why wasn't anyone there this special night? > 10) What is the Ministry doing with Brains? Is it > purely for research on > how the brain works or are the brains from famous > witches and wizards? Like > the rumor that people have kept Einstein's brain in > a jar because of his genius. Brains are a huge mystery to everyone, including wizards so just like med schools keep brains, the wizard world may also study them. > 11) What is the mystery behind the veil? Where did > the veil come from? If > the veil really is that dangerous, why not have the > room locked? Who are > the voices? Do different people hear different > voices when they are close to the veil? That is the Million Dollar question > 12) Why is Hermione not affected by the veil like > Harry and the others? > She is almost hysterical when trying to pry Harry > away from the veil. What > does she know or understand differently? Just like the thestrals, she's never seen death so she doesn't hear it. JULI From willsonkmom at msn.com Tue Dec 21 05:16:18 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 05:16:18 -0000 Subject: Fiction!Snape (was (re: Parenting Harry (was: Re: I don't like him much)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120267 snipping here, snipping there... Eloise wrote: > I have said that Snape performs a particular function in the text, > one which I described as being the unpalatable side of parenting, > being the Enforcer, if you like. (Just as a side note, although I > defined this as a parenting role, it doesn't then necessitate that > the role will be performed well.) > > Take Snape out of the text, as some would clearly like to do, and > tell me who there is as a constant throughout the series, performing that function? Potioncat:(chardonnay in hand) I agree. Me too. So right. Here here (or is it hear hear?) It takes a village to raise Harry Potter. Molly can (s)mother him, Black can play baseball with him, Lupin can give him advice. Snape can punish him. Not that Snape is planning to adopt Harry, but that he performs one role of parenting. Not that he acts like a parent. Just that he performs one role. Punishment/rule enforcement. We're talking Fiction!Snape here, not the character we discuss as if he'd walk in at any moment. Eloise: > > Rule breaking is a constant theme, is it not? Harry frequently flouts the rules, goes for midnight wanders, sneeks out of the castle, etc., etc.. Now if there is no *consequence* for breaking the rules, they might as well not be there. Rule-breaking becomes a complete dud as a theme in the series. Where is the excitement, the frisson of fear, if when Harry wanders the corridors under his Invisibility Cloak, the worst that happens is that he'll have a nice little chat with Dumbledore or that McGonagall will be stern with him and give him a reasonable punishment? Potioncat: McGonagall seemed to perform the enforcement role in SS/PS but something changed. Snape is the one Harry really resents. Sort of like my own kids when I play the enforcer. And a "little chat" with Snape is nothing like a little chat with DD is it? No lemondrops from Severus. Heck DD is the one who gave Harry the cloak. And who dismissed the intrusion into his thoughts (Pensieve) The one who encourages rule breaking, not only for Harry, but for the entire school! (Something along the line of "the list of forbidden objects can be found on Filch's door"...) >Eloise: > Now yes, there is Filch, but he seems to have a function as Snape's lacky; Snape seems to be the teacher to whom he goes with troublemakers. Potioncat: I'm not too sure about this. Filch turned to Umbridge very quickly didn't he? I think Snape used Filch as a way to watch out for Harry. It was a very Slytherin thing to do. I don't think Snape has any respect or concern about Filch. > Eloise: > What I am saying is that Harry pushes boundaries and those boundaries are marked, are personified, if you like, by Snape more than any other character. Snape is the most serious immediate consequence of any discovered rule-breaking. When Harry wanders the corridors with the Map, it is Snape for whom he is on the look out. Potioncat: You are correct here. It is Snape who cares if Harry breaks the rules. Harry and some readers think Snape does it to be mean to Harry. (Of course that's what my teenagers think about me too.) And you know what, I have rules that the other heads of house don't have...I mean that the other moms don't have... Eloise: Harry is at school, so many of the obstacles he has to overcome are rules. These aren't exciting unless the effects of breaking them have serious personal consequences. That's why having the enforcers be so unsympathetic is so effective. snip I'm observing that JKR has placed these two characters in the text and trying to explain why they might be there, what function they might perform and why making them so mean to Harry is an effective plot device. Potioncat: This is the point I wanted to get to. For all the discussion about why Snape does what he does; For all the arguments about who should change: Harry or Snape; For all the talk about Snape's teaching methods...the real question is: "What is Fiction!Snape's role in this story?" From willsonkmom at msn.com Tue Dec 21 05:22:37 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 05:22:37 -0000 Subject: Fiction!Snape (was (re: Parenting Harry (was: Re: I don't like him much)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120268 > snipping here, snipping there... > Eloise wrote: I have said that Snape performs a particular function in the text, one which I described as being the unpalatable side of parenting, being the Enforcer, if you like. (Just as a side note, although I defined this as a parenting role, it doesn't then necessitate that the role will be performed well.) > > > > Take Snape out of the text, as some would clearly like to do, and tell me who there is as a constant throughout the series, performing that function? Potioncat: Actually, it's a shame he doesn't take the same role for the Slytherin students. From antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com Tue Dec 21 06:20:40 2004 From: antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com (antoshachekhonte) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 06:20:40 -0000 Subject: Fiction!Snape (was (re: Parenting Harry (was: Re: I don't like him much)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120269 > Potioncat: > This is the point I wanted to get to. For all the discussion about > why Snape does what he does; For all the arguments about who should > change: Harry or Snape; For all the talk about Snape's teaching > methods...the real question is: "What is Fiction!Snape's role in > this story?" Antosha: Good questions! It seems to me that F!S's role is threefold: 1) to take over from Vernon the role the wicked stepfather/negative parent--the one who tells you all the things you don't want to hear, and against whom you are expected to rebel in order to develop your own identity. 2) To introduce smears of grey into Harry's congenitally black-and-white (or red- and-green) perception of reality. 3) To serve as the perpetual red herring. From hippievanlady at yahoo.com Mon Dec 20 23:37:29 2004 From: hippievanlady at yahoo.com (hippievanlady) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 23:37:29 -0000 Subject: Did Fred and George mark themselves? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120270 I'm wondering if Fred and George marked themselves to be Voldemort's first Weasley victims. In Sorcerer's Stone (page 194) they get into trouble for bewitching snowballs to follow and hit Professor Quirrell on the back of his turban. When re-reading that book subsequently, that passage made me laugh that they were actually hitting Voldemort in the face. I didn't give it much thought until after attending a party this week. The host gave chocolate frogs as party favors. Mine came with a Quirinus Quirrell card in it. The image they chose for the front of the card was of the twins throwing the snowballs and hitting a pathetic looking Quirrell. It does seem that is the kind of thing that Voldemort might take personal. Catherine From packsim at aol.com Tue Dec 21 00:43:40 2004 From: packsim at aol.com (packsim at aol.com) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 19:43:40 EST Subject: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 34, "The Department of Mysteries" Message-ID: <155.46661932.2ef8cbbc@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120271 > Questions: > > 1) Thestrals obviously understand human language since they were able to > understand Harry's instructions. Why is that? Can most magical > animal/beasts/beings understand the human language? A1). Might I suggest some magical creatures can understand Wizard humans based on their magic. > 10) What is the Ministry doing with Brains? Is it purely for research on > how the brain works or are the brains from famous witches and wizards? Like > the rumor that people have kept Einstein's brain in a jar because of his > genius. A10). Perhaps it's generating some sort of power. Or have I seen too many science fiction movies? If the basis of magic is in the brain, it would make sense that the most powerful wizards donate (willingly or not) their brains upon their death. > 12) Why is Hermione not affected by the veil like Harry and the others? > She is almost hysterical when trying to pry Harry away from the veil. What > does she know or understand differently? A12). I think Hermione senses there is something not quite right about the veil. Trelawney has said she has no inner eye for divination, but when Trelawney is wrong, she's usually really wrong. Hermione might sense it's a one-way trip somewhere you really don't want to go to right now. > 14) Seems there must be significance to the prophecy being in row 97, any > ideas? Could it be the year that the prophecy will come true? What about > row 53, is there significance that this was the first row seen by the group > upon entering the hall of prophecy. If it indeed refers to dates, 1953 might be the year Tom Riddle, aka Lord Voldemort, went over to pure evil, pure darkness. That might have caused a ruckus in the divination crowd. But it makes me wonder where do all these prophecies come from? Does no one check for accuracy? Are they being logged and followed? Or is it like the room at the end of "Raiders of the Lost Ark" where they are merely kept and ignored? > 15) When Harry doesn't find Sirius being tortured, he deals with his > mistake by treating his friends horribly. Is this a direct result of his > up-bringing? A15). Perhaps it is because he feels he has failed and he's not used to failure? He might be beginning to believe his hype... that's he's really invincible and unfailing because he's got good intentions. The other questions are ones I'm still questioning myself. These are the ones I have theories for. ~Lisa the Lurker From jennifer_maccherone at yahoo.com Tue Dec 21 03:00:06 2004 From: jennifer_maccherone at yahoo.com (jennifer_maccherone) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 03:00:06 -0000 Subject: Death Eaters Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120272 I've been thinking about why Voldemort didn't die. JKR always chooses names that are significant. What exactly does "Death Eater" mean? How does one "eat" death? Death Cheaters seems to make more sense or even Those Who Like to Cause Death for Fun. Did Voldemort's followers do (eat?) something to help him gain immortality? Is this in anyway related to the Dementors sucking souls? Can anyone explain the Death Eater name to me? "jennifer_maccherone" From imamommy at sbcglobal.net Tue Dec 21 07:35:07 2004 From: imamommy at sbcglobal.net (imamommy at sbcglobal.net) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 07:35:07 -0000 Subject: One last try (re: Parenting Harry (was: Re: I don't like him much)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120273 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: > >snip Del: > > But Snape *does* have *some* of Harry's best interests in mind. > > For example, judging from what he said in the Shrieking Shack, he > seems to think that James got himself and Lily killed because he was > so big-headed that he couldn't think straight anymore. As a > consequence, he tries to prevent Harry from developing such a big head > too, something he sees as an inevitable consequence of Harry's fame, > his success at Quidditch, and the fact that DD is so lenient with him. > > Another example is his insistence that Harry follows the rules. He > knows what dangers lurk around (he is, after all, a Dark Arts > specialist), and he doesn't want Harry to run into them. > > Even as a teacher, he does have some of Harry's best interests in > mind. He keeps giving him additional homework whenever he feels Harry > hasn't learned a Potions lesson well enough, and he threatens to > poison him in order to make sure that Harry will know his antidotes by > heart. > imamommy: This becomes the departure point. You see Snape as having Harry's best interest at heart; I see Snape as being an embittered, angry man with an axe to grind. I don't think Snape disciplines Harry to groom him for society, or to help him become a better person, or to help him fight VM. I think he disciplines, or punishes, Harry because he's being vindictive towards Harry and, vicariously, James. I agree with Eloise that Snape fills the literary function of being the disciplinarian, and I do not wish for his removal. The scenes with Snape are some of the most exciting to read, IMO. I'm sorry if I missed your point, Eloise. imamommy From emhutch at sbcglobal.net Tue Dec 21 07:20:11 2004 From: emhutch at sbcglobal.net (eilissf1906) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 07:20:11 -0000 Subject: Did Fred and George mark themselves? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120274 Catherine wrote: > > I'm wondering if Fred and George marked themselves to be > Voldemort's first Weasley victims. In Sorcerer's Stone > (page 194) they get into trouble for bewitching snowballs > to follow and hit Professor Quirrell on the back of his > turban. When re-reading that book subsequently, that > passage made me laugh that they were actually hitting > Voldemort in the face. I'm not sure, but was this after Voldie possesed Quirrell? I think he fused himself to Q sometime in the spring but it's entirely possible I'm mixing things up. I hope so because if I'm not... yep the Twins are screwed. Even more so by the whole blood traitor/Weasley/Harrys'bestfriend'sbrothersthing. Eilis From lindydivaus at yahoo.com Tue Dec 21 01:46:36 2004 From: lindydivaus at yahoo.com (Eileen Forster Keck) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 17:46:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 34, "The Department of Mysteries" In-Reply-To: <1103592224.18271.44351.m22@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <20041221014636.48069.qmail@web50802.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120275 Amdorn asks: > 4) When riding the Thestrals to the Ministry of > Magic, could the riders be seen? Can only people > who see thestrals normally be able to see the > riders during flight? I think a number of people have wondered this. After some thought I suspect that anything that comes into contact with a Thestral gains some of its properties; after all, no one comments on apparently empty harnesses being held up in front of the carriages. So the harnesses become invisible when they come into contact with the Thestrals...in that case, perhaps a rider would, too. Eileen ===== "One must be fond of people and trust them if one is not to make a mess of life." E.M. Forster "I am sure of this, that if everybody was to drink their bottle a day, there would not be half the disorders in the world there are now. It would be a famous good thing for us all." Jane Austen From kcawte at ntlworld.com Tue Dec 21 08:27:17 2004 From: kcawte at ntlworld.com (Kathryn Cawte) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 08:27:17 -0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] First Riddle on JKR's website (Website Spoiler See it yourself First ) References: Message-ID: <007101c4e738$ca65f1c0$69206bd5@kathryn> No: HPFGUIDX 120276 > > > Jen: I think the first riddle holds promise because it can be read > several different ways. Here's the riddle (without the answer) after > some spoiler space: > > * > * > * > * > * > * > * > * > * > * > * > * > * > * > > "I cannot be other than what I am > Until the man who made me dies > Power and glory will fall to me, finally > Only when he last closes his eyes." > > K I don't know exactly why - and don't have time to consider it right now, I'll probably post again once I get to work - but this reminded me strongly of the prophecy and in fact my first guess at an answer was Potter. K From annezilla1 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 21 08:13:32 2004 From: annezilla1 at yahoo.com (Anne Williams) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 00:13:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: Voldie and Ghosts Message-ID: <20041221081332.65840.qmail@web14601.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120277 Though I don't post much- ok rarely- it just occured to me as I was lying in bed about to sleep and thought I might get some other people's input, though I am not sure if this has been discussed. It seems to me that Harry has to "vanquish" Voldie in such a way that he can not have the choice to come back as a ghost. We know that Voldie fears death so much as to do whatever he did to not die when the Avada rebounded to him from Harry, not to mention his own admission that he thinks "there is nothing worse than death" (OOP, 814, American edition). Furthermore, even as a ghost, he would still be able to control the other death eaters by giving them orders. Not to mention he would try to find a way to live again, after all he did it before. (Which leads to a sideline topic of what exactly Vapormort was, but that's for another day.) This brought me into thoughts of what can be done to prevent a person, besides their own determination, to become a ghost. We don't know for sure, but it seems to me that because the Dementor's Kiss steals a person's soul, that this would be one viable way for him to totally disappear. But I am also wondering what other things might be out there. Any thoughts or anything I am over looking? -Anne (despite her unability to remember if there are other Annes, and knowing full well the probability that there are) From theadimail at yahoo.co.in Tue Dec 21 09:30:28 2004 From: theadimail at yahoo.co.in (theadimail) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 09:30:28 -0000 Subject: Christmas Riddles Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120278 Hi, A cursory examination of the Christmas Riddles on JKR's site reveal this fact: Three of the riddles have the answers which together form the name of the book. The other three riddles have references to the trio. Taking the second groups first. All of them are just basic straightforward questions. Nothing much of riddles there. But two of the three questions can be very important in the next book. Consider Bristol. This will become important if the next book contains description of what happened on that fateful night when Voldie was vanquished. And Hermione's otter can come in handy if she is attacked by a dementor. A distinct possiblity. I can't figure out how corned beef sandwich will be helpful but maybe it suggests that Ron won't have much to do in the next book just as in book 5. As for the former set of riddles. These are poems but the most intriguing of them is definitely the one pertaining to 'prince'. Many have been debating the exact meaning of 'prince' to figure out who HBP is. But if the riddle is any clue the prince is definitely used in the sense of son of the king, or heir to the throne or kingdom or whatever. Since it cannot be Harry or Voldie, who is it? I have a hunch that this will be a positive character and the lion-man might be him. But who? Thanks, Adi From R.Vink2 at chello.nl Tue Dec 21 09:59:38 2004 From: R.Vink2 at chello.nl (Renee) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 09:59:38 -0000 Subject: One last try (re: Parenting Harry (was: Re: I don't like him much)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120279 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > > Renee: > > And this is probably where the miscommunication arises, because here > we're exchanging the level of the storyline, the history of what > happened to one Harry Potter, for the level of the narrative and the > techniques used to make the plot work and bring about the desired > effects. > > Alla: > > Could you clarify, please? Renee again: What I was trying to say was, that discussing Snape as a character and discussing him als a plot device with a certain function in the story are two different things and can lead to very different assessments. If one poster talks about Snape's flaws as a person and criticises him for his behaviour and another poster is trying to assess his function in the narrative and values the role he's been assigned to play, they'll end up misunderstanding each other. When I read your exchange with Eloise, I thought I saw that happening. > Renee: > snip. > > In a way, Snape *is* the `bad parent', disguised as a teacher - just > as in many fairy-tales the `bad mother' (= every mother's necessary > unpleasant side) is disguised as the evil stepmother. > > > Alla: > > Sure, I have NO problem, calling Snape "bad parent" with the emphasis > on "bad". This mixture of fairytale and more and more exploration of > real issues is another problem we encounter in OOP analysis. Renee again: It seems to me this problem is related to the change in tone of OotP. Suddenly the right way to approach and analyse the series has become an issue as well, in addition to the analysis itself. From severelysigune at yahoo.co.uk Tue Dec 21 11:01:35 2004 From: severelysigune at yahoo.co.uk (severelysigune) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 11:01:35 -0000 Subject: Death Eaters In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120280 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jennifer_maccherone" wrote: > > I've been thinking about why Voldemort didn't die. JKR always > chooses names that are significant. What exactly does "Death Eater" > mean? How does one "eat" death? Death Cheaters seems to make more > sense or even Those Who Like to Cause Death for Fun. Did > Voldemort's followers do (eat?) something to help him gain > immortality? Is this in anyway related to the Dementors sucking > souls? Can anyone explain the Death Eater name to me? > > > "jennifer_maccherone" Sigune: Hi Jennifer, I have been thinking about that, too. Some time ago on this list, Anne/Silverthorne posted a good supposition of what Dark Arts might be, based on what folklore considers 'Dark'. I copied the post for my own files, but was stupid enough not to write down the number. In any case, here is what she had to say about Death Eating: "Brain Eaters (Also called...*gasp* Death Eaters)--a subset of Necromancy?the practitioner eats the brains of the dead in order to gain knowledge and/or power." I have heard of this kind of practice before - it's why headhunters - er- headhunt. They kill in order to absorb their rivals' power into themselves. It's not just a practice from the more unexplored corners of the Southern hemisphere; the Celts reasoned similarly, even though, as far as I know, they didn't literally eat the brains - they kept the skulls, or in Ireland (at least in the story of Cormac McArt) they prepared the brains and kept them stored somehow. This puts a nice, sinister spin on Death Eater practices, doesn't it? And it certainly makes 'Death Eater' (even if in JKR's universe they might *not* eat brains) a lot more frightening than 'Knight of Walpurgis'... Yours severely, Sigune From willsonkmom at msn.com Tue Dec 21 11:32:29 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 11:32:29 -0000 Subject: Death Eaters In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120281 Sigune wrote: snip > I have heard of this kind of practice before - it's why headhunters - > er- headhunt. They kill in order to absorb their rivals' power into > themselves. It's not just a practice from the more unexplored corners > of the Southern hemisphere; the Celts reasoned similarly, even > though, as far as I know, they didn't literally eat the brains - they > kept the skulls, or in Ireland (at least in the story of Cormac > McArt) they prepared the brains and kept them stored somehow. Potioncat: You mean, like in a large tank in a special room? From emhutch at sbcglobal.net Tue Dec 21 10:49:15 2004 From: emhutch at sbcglobal.net (eilissf1906) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 10:49:15 -0000 Subject: Christmas Riddles In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120282 Adi wrote: > ...Rather large SNIP... > I can't figure out how corned > beef sandwich will be helpful but maybe it suggests that Ron won't > have much to do in the next book just as in book 5.> Well who fixes Ron his hated corned beef sandwitches?... His mother of course. We know there will be other deaths, why not Molly, it will crush most of the main characters (Harry, Ginny, Ron, the twins, everyone Harry sees on a day-to-day basis really.) I think sometime soon Ron will be looking back to those sandwiches with longing. Eilis- Who quite likes Mrs. Weasley, and hopes she's wrong... From severelysigune at yahoo.co.uk Tue Dec 21 12:15:41 2004 From: severelysigune at yahoo.co.uk (severelysigune) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 12:15:41 -0000 Subject: Death Eaters In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120283 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: Sigune wrote: > snip > > I have heard of this kind of practice before - it's why > headhunters - > > er- headhunt. They kill in order to absorb their rivals' power > into > > themselves. It's not just a practice from the more unexplored > corners > > of the Southern hemisphere; the Celts reasoned similarly, even > > though, as far as I know, they didn't literally eat the brains - > they > > kept the skulls, or in Ireland (at least in the story of Cormac > > McArt) they prepared the brains and kept them stored somehow. > Potioncat: > You mean, like in a large tank in a special room? Sigune: Er... That occurred to me after I had just posted... But in fact, in the Cormac McArt tale, they roll the brains into hard balls like large bullets and occasionally smash someone's skull with them - so they are not really brains of the tentacly sort :-). Still - I really want to find out more about why the Death Eaters are called Death Eaters, apart from the name sounding morbid. The death part certainly could have some relevance to Voldie's quest for immortality; but even if I have found myself a FEATHERBOA sometime ago, somehow I doubt that JKR is going to show us, say, Lucius Malfoy eating someone's brain. In any case I will be disappointed if we never hear anything more about the name. From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Tue Dec 21 12:26:03 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 12:26:03 -0000 Subject: July 16, July 16! Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120284 Yippee!! We'll have the new book on July 16!!!!!!! See TLC for story: http://www.the-leaky- cauldron.org/MTarchives/week_2004_12_19.html#005362 Siriusly Snapey Susan From Vivamus at TaprootTech.com Tue Dec 21 12:29:40 2004 From: Vivamus at TaprootTech.com (Vivamus) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 07:29:40 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] First Riddle on JKR's website (Website Spoiler See it yourself First ) In-Reply-To: <20041221024426.28613.qmail@web53510.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <200412210730298.SM01060@devbox> No: HPFGUIDX 120285 > Another thought occured to me. If the Prince can only become > something more if the one who made him dies, then that would > lead me to believe there is a king of some variety out there. > Who can we see that would be a king? If this riddle holds > true, then the person has not died yet or the prince would > become the king. Lets list all the kings that we know of in > the books. > > moonmyyst Vivamus: Here are all uses of the word "king" in all five books: Loads of references to King's Cross station Chess kings. In PS/SS, "The white king took off his crown and threw it at Harry's feet." CoS: The Basilisk is the King of Serpents OOtP: Weasley Is Our King, in three variants. First, by the Slytherins, then "Luna, on the other hand, sang 'Weasley is our King' dreamily under her breath and stirred her drink with a cocktail onion on a stick," and, finally, the Gryffindors singing what is almost certainly Luna's rewritten version. Also a passing reference to NHNick singing something that sounded "horribly like Weasley is our King", several references to Ron by Malfoy as "Weasel King" and a reference to Weasley is our King by Ginny when they are planning how to get into Umbridge's office. And that's it. From saraandra at saraandra.plus.com Tue Dec 21 12:34:14 2004 From: saraandra at saraandra.plus.com (amanitamuscaria1) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 12:34:14 -0000 Subject: First Riddle on JKR's website (Website Spoiler See it yourself First ) In-Reply-To: <20041221024426.28613.qmail@web53510.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120286 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, K G wrote: > some spoiler space: > > * > * > * > * > * > * > * > * > * > * > * > * > * > * > > "I cannot be other than what I am > Until the man who made me dies > Power and glory will fall to me, finally > Only when he last closes his eyes." snippity-snip > > Another thought occured to me. If the Prince can only become something more if the one who made him dies, then that would lead me to believe there is a king of some variety out there. Who can we see that would be a king? If this riddle holds true, then the person has not died yet or the prince would become the king. Lets list all the kings that we know of in the books. > > moonmyyst AmanitaMuscaria now: Uh-Oh! What leaps immediately to my mind is 'Weasley is our king!' Cheers. AmanitaMuscaria From dfrankiswork at netscape.net Tue Dec 21 13:15:42 2004 From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (davewitley) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 13:15:42 -0000 Subject: First Riddle on JKR's website (Website Spoiler See it yourself First ) In-Reply-To: <20041221024426.28613.qmail@web53510.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120287 Jen Reese: > Here's the riddle (without the answer) after > some spoiler space: > > * > * > * > * > * > * > * > * > * > * > * > * > * > * > > "I cannot be other than what I am > Until the man who made me dies > Power and glory will fall to me, finally > Only when he last closes his eyes." moonmyyst: > Another thought occured to me. If the Prince can only become something more if the one who made him dies, then that would lead me to believe there is a king of some variety out there. Who can we see that would be a king? If this riddle holds true, then the person has not died yet or the prince would become the king. Lets list all the kings that we know of in the books. Yes, that was my thought. The riddle does rather focus on prince-as- heir-to-king rather than prince-in-his-own-right (after all, there have been historical (and fictional) principalities whose head of state is a hereditary prince, e.g. Monte Carlo: if JKR's riddle is truly a clue she has implicitly ruled this out). I don't believe there are that many kings mentioned in the books. The only thing I can think of is that the references to Merlin's beard, and Morgana in the wizard cards, can be taken to imply that King Arthur existed historically in JKR's universe. Given that legend has it that he is still alive, asleep under wherever-it-is, waiting to be woken at the time of Britain's greatest need, there are a number of intriguing (though IMO rather unlikely given JKR's track record so far) possibilities. In particular, you might want to look at http://www.kingarthursknights.com/others/mordred.asp Note especially: "The incest motif in the story of Mordred's birth appears only latterly. The earliest occurence is in the Mort Artu. In Malory's version, Arthur slept with his half-sister Morgause, not knowing they were related and, as a result, Mordred was born." Malory is IMO the best known telling of the Arthur legend, and Morgause was a witch, sister IIRC to Morgana. David From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Tue Dec 21 13:20:47 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 08:20:47 -0500 Subject: July 16th Message-ID: <000a01c4e75f$e37c2590$64c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 120288 http://jam.canoe.ca/Books/2004/12/20/791544-ap.html CathyD TrentonON [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From lea_petra at yahoo.com Tue Dec 21 12:30:06 2004 From: lea_petra at yahoo.com (Mari Lea) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 04:30:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: July 16, July 16! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041221123006.3934.qmail@web60007.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120289 Siriusly Snapey Susan wrote: > Yippee!! We'll have the new book on July 16!!!!!!! > > See TLC for story: http://www.the-leaky- > cauldron.org/MTarchives/week_2004_12_19.html#005362 Yet another Harry Potter book for my son's birthday.!!! BTW here's the tiny URL the first won did not come through on my email. http://tinyurl.com/447d5 Mari From kirsty_lowson at yahoo.com Tue Dec 21 13:09:03 2004 From: kirsty_lowson at yahoo.com (Kirsty Lowson) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 13:09:03 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] July 16, July 16! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041221130903.15900.qmail@web53710.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120290 Siriusly Snapey Susan wrote: > > Yippee!! We'll have the new book on July > 16!!!!!!! > > See TLC for story: http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/MTarchives/week_2004_12_19.html#005362 Yippee!!!!!!!!!!!! *marks July 16 as a Significant Day* Saw it on the ITV ceefax then went racing round the net to confirm -- see TLC, Bloomsbury, Mugglenet or bbc.co.uk for confirmation :-) So Somebody Important will die...given the riddles, this is worrying... :-S Kirsty (going to play catchup on 300 HPfGU messages) From moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 21 13:47:00 2004 From: moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com (K G) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 05:47:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] First Riddle on JKR's website (Website Spoiler See it yourself First ) In-Reply-To: <200412210730298.SM01060@devbox> Message-ID: <20041221134701.99373.qmail@web53501.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120291 Vivamus wrote: > Another thought occured to me. If the Prince can only become > something more if the one who made him dies, then that would > lead me to believe there is a king of some variety out there. > Who can we see that would be a king? If this riddle holds > true, then the person has not died yet or the prince would > become the king. Lets list all the kings that we know of in > the books. > > moonmyyst Vivamus: Here are all uses of the word "king" in all five books: Loads of references to King's Cross station Chess kings. In PS/SS, "The white king took off his crown and threw it at Harry's feet." CoS: The Basilisk is the King of Serpents OOtP: Weasley Is Our King, in three variants. First, by the Slytherins, then "Luna, on the other hand, sang 'Weasley is our King' dreamily under her breath and stirred her drink with a cocktail onion on a stick," and, finally, the Gryffindors singing what is almost certainly Luna's rewritten version. Also a passing reference to NHNick singing something that sounded "horribly like Weasley is our King", several references to Ron by Malfoy as "Weasel King" and a reference to Weasley is our King by Ginny when they are planning how to get into Umbridge's office. And that's it. Would Aragog be considered a king? What about the giants? Centaurs? How are the goblins lead? I personally do not think that the HBP is a creature. (maybe a half creature?) moonmyyst --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From Vivamus at TaprootTech.com Tue Dec 21 14:17:52 2004 From: Vivamus at TaprootTech.com (Vivamus) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 09:17:52 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] First Riddle on JKR's website (Website Spoiler See it yourself First ) In-Reply-To: <20041221134701.99373.qmail@web53501.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <200412210918387.SM01040@devbox> No: HPFGUIDX 120292 > > Another thought occured to me. If the Prince can only become > > something more if the one who made him dies, then that > would lead me > > to believe there is a king of some variety out there. > > Who can we see that would be a king? If this riddle holds > true, then > > the person has not died yet or the prince would become the > king. Lets > > list all the kings that we know of in the books. > > > > moonmyyst > > Vivamus: > Here are all uses of the word "king" in all five books: > > And that's it. > > moonmyyst: > Would Aragog be considered a king? What about the giants? > Centaurs? How are the goblins lead? I personally do not > think that the HBP is a creature. (maybe a half creature?) > > moonmyyst Vivamus: They are all possibilities; we just don't have any information about them. The Giant leader was called something else, not a king. I just searched the text for all occurrences of the word "king" in the five published books so far. I'm still holding out for the HBP being one of three: 1. Neville (for reasons already discussed) 2. Seamus Finnegan (for no other information than that he has been in all the books, and was prominently mentioned as being half-blood in the first book) 3. someone we haven't met Vivamus From hpfgu.elves at gmail.com Tue Dec 21 14:57:50 2004 From: hpfgu.elves at gmail.com (hpfgu_elves) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 14:57:50 -0000 Subject: ADMIN: New Updates to Rowling's Website/Release Date Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120293 Greetings from Hexquarters! We are all extremely excited to see a new update to JKR's website, with the release of the next book now much closer to being reality. Just a reminder that to avoid parallel discussions and to be consistent with posting rules, we need our list members to observe the following: * If your post discusses the information on Rowling's site about the characters, the plot or any other information about the books themselves (including discarded scenes and backstories), please post it on this list. * If your post discusses how to use the website, access the flash features, figure out the new riddles, discuss your scrapbook, or anything else relating to the site itself or Rowling rather than the HP books themselves, please post it on the OT-Chatter list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-OTChatter * In addition, since we all now know that the release date is coming out very soon, please try **not** to send any messages about that information alone. One-line and me-too posts are strongly discouraged on the list; make each post count! If you have any questions about your post, please contact us at: hpforgrownups-owner@ yahoogroups.com (without the spaces). Thanks for your cooperation! --Alto Elf for the HPfGU List Administration team From gbannister10 at aol.com Tue Dec 21 15:23:57 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 15:23:57 -0000 Subject: July 16, July 16! In-Reply-To: <20041221130903.15900.qmail@web53710.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120294 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Kirsty Lowson wrote: > > > > Siriusly Snapey Susan > wrote: > > > > Yippee!! We'll have the new book on July > > 16!!!!!!! > > > > See TLC for story: > http://www.the-leaky- cauldron.org/MTarchives/week_2004_12_19.html#005362 > > > Yippee!!!!!!!!!!!! > > *marks July 16 as a Significant Day* > > Saw it on the ITV ceefax then went racing round > the net to confirm -- see TLC, Bloomsbury, > Mugglenet or bbc.co.uk for confirmation :-) > > So Somebody Important will die...given the > riddles, this is worrying... :-S > Kirsty > (going to play catchup on 300 HPfGU messages) Geoff: Oh dear, that's 207 days for speculation as to who will pop their clogs/turn their paws up/shuffle off this mortal coil or whatever. OK, perhaps we should ask Gred and Forge to open a betting shop in Diagon Alley to deal with the matter (unless one or other of them are marked down - it's those damned snowballs again!). Toasted Snape, Sybill? Hm. This might stop the abuse/behaviour slew of threads for the moment. :-) From moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 21 15:51:50 2004 From: moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com (K G) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 07:51:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: July 16, July 16! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041221155150.44117.qmail@web53510.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120295 Geoff Bannister wrote: Geoff: Oh dear, that's 207 days for speculation as to who will pop their clogs/turn their paws up/shuffle off this mortal coil or whatever. OK, perhaps we should ask Gred and Forge to open a betting shop in Diagon Alley to deal with the matter (unless one or other of them are marked down - it's those damned snowballs again!). Toasted Snape, Sybill? Hm. This might stop the abuse/behaviour slew of threads for the moment. :-) Okay, we all know that some one is going to take the eternal dirt nap (see Geoff... I can come up with one too!!). JKR has said so. We also know that she stated that she cried when she knocked off Sirius. Do we have any statements from her along those lines about this next one? All that I have heard is that it is a main character and that it is not Harry or LV. So, lets go down the list of the usual suspects and see if we can get our facts together: 1) any of the Dursleys - not likely in my opinion as JKR has stated they will hardly be mentioned in this book. 2) Hermione and family 3) Ron 4) Arthur 5) Molly 6) Bill 7) Charlie 8) Percy 9) the Twins 10) Ginny 11) Dumbledore 12) Snape 13) McGonnegal (I can never spell her name right) 14) Flintwick 15) Pomphrey 16) Sprout 17) Malfoy (who says it has to be a good guy?) 18) Crabbe and Goyle 19) Lucius 20) Neville 21) Dean 22) Seamus (horrible spelling again) 23) Pavarti 24) Lavender 25) Hagrid 26) Lupin 27) Peter 28) Tonks 29) Shackelbolt 30) Moody 31) Fudge 32) Rosemerta Okay, folks, lets narrow the list using canon and interviews. Also, am I missing anyone? moonmyyst (hoping that this is close enough to canon that the list elves do not lob any more snowballs my way.... I am still shaking that last one from the back of my shirt!!!) __________________________________________________ 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 moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 21 15:58:39 2004 From: moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com (K G) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 07:58:39 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Usual cast of suspects In-Reply-To: <20041221155150.44117.qmail@web53510.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041221155839.38711.qmail@web53509.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120296 K G wrote: Okay, we all know that some one is going to take the eternal dirt nap (see Geoff... I can come up with one too!!). JKR has said so. We also know that she stated that she cried when she knocked off Sirius. Do we have any statements from her along those lines about this next one? All that I have heard is that it is a main character and that it is not Harry or LV. So, lets go down the list of the usual suspects and see if we can get our facts together: 1) any of the Dursleys - not likely in my opinion as JKR has stated they will hardly be mentioned in this book. 2) Hermione and family 3) Ron 4) Arthur 5) Molly 6) Bill 7) Charlie 8) Percy 9) the Twins 10) Ginny 11) Dumbledore 12) Snape 13) McGonnegal (I can never spell her name right) 14) Flintwick 15) Pomphrey 16) Sprout 17) Malfoy (who says it has to be a good guy?) 18) Crabbe and Goyle 19) Lucius 20) Neville 21) Dean 22) Seamus (horrible spelling again) 23) Pavarti 24) Lavender 25) Hagrid 26) Lupin 27) Peter 28) Tonks 29) Shackelbolt 30) Moody 31) Fudge 32) Rosemerta Okay, folks, lets narrow the list using canon and interviews. Also, am I missing anyone? moonmyyst (hoping that this is close enough to canon that the list elves do not lob any more snowballs my way.... I am still shaking that last one from the back of my shirt!!!) let me add.... 33) Dobby 34) Filch 35) Lee Jordan --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Easier than ever with enhanced search. Learn more. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 21 16:05:20 2004 From: moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com (K G) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 08:05:20 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Usual cast of suspects (a few more added) In-Reply-To: <20041221155839.38711.qmail@web53509.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041221160521.18425.qmail@web53506.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120297 Okay, we all know that some one is going to take the eternal dirt nap (see Geoff... I can come up with one too!!). JKR has said so. We also know that she stated that she cried when she knocked off Sirius. Do we have any statements from her along those lines about this next one? All that I have heard is that it is a main character and that it is not Harry or LV. So, lets go down the list of the usual suspects and see if we can get our facts together: 1) any of the Dursleys - not likely in my opinion as JKR has stated they will hardly be mentioned in this book. 2) Hermione and family 3) Ron 4) Arthur 5) Molly 6) Bill 7) Charlie 8) Percy 9) the Twins 10) Ginny 11) Dumbledore 12) Snape 13) McGonnegal (I can never spell her name right) 14) Flintwick 15) Pomphrey 16) Sprout 17) Malfoy (who says it has to be a good guy?) 18) Crabbe and Goyle 19) Lucius 20) Neville 21) Dean 22) Seamus (horrible spelling again) 23) Pavarti 24) Lavender 25) Hagrid 26) Lupin 27) Peter 28) Tonks 29) Shackelbolt 30) Moody 31) Fudge 32) Rosemerta 33) Dobby 34) Filch 35) Lee Jordan 36) Katie 37) Alicia 38) Angelina 39) Cho 40) Fleur 41) Krum Okay, folks, lets narrow the list using canon and interviews. Also, am I missing anyone? moonmyyst (hoping that this is close enough to canon that the list elves do not lob any more snowballs my way.... I am still shaking that last one from the back of my shirt!!!) __________________________________________________ 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 luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca Tue Dec 21 16:08:06 2004 From: luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca (Bee Chase) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 11:08:06 -0500 (EST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] First Riddle on JKR's website (Website Spoiler See it yourself First ) In-Reply-To: <20041221134701.99373.qmail@web53501.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041221160807.50021.qmail@web52008.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120298 K G wrote: Vivamus wrote: > Another thought occured to me. If the Prince can only become > something more if the one who made him dies, then that would > lead me to believe there is a king of some variety out there. > Who can we see that would be a king? If this riddle holds > true, then the person has not died yet or the prince would > become the king. Lets list all the kings that we know of in > the books. > > moonmyyst Vivamus: Here are all uses of the word "king" in all five books: Loads of references to King's Cross station Chess kings. In PS/SS, "The white king took off his crown and threw it at Harry's feet." CoS: The Basilisk is the King of Serpents OOtP: Weasley Is Our King, in three variants. First, by the Slytherins, then "Luna, on the other hand, sang 'Weasley is our King' dreamily under her breath and stirred her drink with a cocktail onion on a stick," and, finally, the Gryffindors singing what is almost certainly Luna's rewritten version. Also a passing reference to NHNick singing something that sounded "horribly like Weasley is our King", several references to Ron by Malfoy as "Weasel King" and a reference to Weasley is our King by Ginny when they are planning how to get into Umbridge's office. And that's it. Luckdragon: It does appear that the only references so far to royalty are based on the Weasley(Ron)is our King theme. I looked up the origin of corned beef and found it was a dish served in Ireland which was more likely to be served to a king than the people? Hmmm... But how could royalty fit into the Weasley family without anyone knowing? There is of course the coincidence of the names Arthur and Percy being related to the King Arthur tale, but even if Arthur as "King" of the family were to die; Ron is the youngest boy and least likely to take on the title. 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 delwynmarch at yahoo.com Tue Dec 21 16:09:55 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 16:09:55 -0000 Subject: ADMIN: Rudeness and Insults, again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120299 Janet Anderson wrote: " You know, that's what I thought too, and I solved the problem by using my "Block Sender" option. I'm surprised more people didn't think of such a simple solution." Del replies: I read the posts online... And funnily enough, though I've encountered trolls in other groups, I didn't identify this one right away... And I must admit that in a weird sarcastic way I almost enjoyed his posts ;-) Bad Del, Bad Del ! From moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 21 16:15:20 2004 From: moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com (K G) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 08:15:20 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Usual cast of suspects (a few more added) In-Reply-To: <20041221160521.18425.qmail@web53506.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041221161520.58271.qmail@web53501.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120300 Okay, we all know that some one is going to take the eternal dirt nap (see Geoff... I can come up with one too!!). JKR has said so. We also know that she stated that she cried when she knocked off Sirius. Do we have any statements from her along those lines about this next one? All that I have heard is that it is a main character and that it is not Harry or LV. So, lets go down the list of the usual suspects and see if we can get our facts together: 1) any of the Dursleys - not likely in my opinion as JKR has stated they will hardly be mentioned in this book. 2) Hermione and family 3) Ron 4) Arthur 5) Molly 6) Bill 7) Charlie 8) Percy 9) the Twins 10) Ginny 11) Dumbledore 12) Snape 13) McGonnegal (I can never spell her name right) 14) Flintwick 15) Pomphrey 16) Sprout 17) Malfoy (who says it has to be a good guy?) 18) Crabbe and Goyle 19) Lucius 20) Neville 21) Dean 22) Seamus (horrible spelling again) 23) Pavarti 24) Lavender 25) Hagrid 26) Lupin 27) Peter 28) Tonks 29) Shackelbolt 30) Moody 31) Fudge 32) Rosemerta 33) Dobby 34) Filch 35) Lee Jordan 36) Katie 37) Alicia 38) Angelina 39) Cho 40) Fleur 41) Krum 42 Grawp (he was just pointed out to me!!!) Okay, folks, lets narrow the list using canon and interviews. Also, am I missing anyone? moonmyyst (hoping that this is close enough to canon that the list elves do not lob any more snowballs my way.... I am still shaking that last one from the back of my shirt!!!) __________________________________________________ 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] 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 - You care about security. So do we. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From houseofbohacek at earthlink.net Tue Dec 21 16:19:49 2004 From: houseofbohacek at earthlink.net (klyanthea) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 16:19:49 -0000 Subject: (Filk) We Cannot Lose This Game Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120301 I'm so happy about the good news that I'm all psyched to compose again! We Cannot Lose This Game A Filk by Gail B. to the tune of _You're Going to Lose that Girl_ by the Beatles Midi is found here: http://www.geocities.com/SunsetStrip/Studio/7779/beatle09.html (the music in the Midi falls short of the lyrics, just so you know) Oliver Wood (The Gryffindor Quidditch Team): We cannot lose this game (no, no, we cannot lose this game) We cannot lose (no, no, we cannot lose this game) this game I will be leaving at the end of this my final year (He's going to disappear) Therefore I fully do intend to win, but still I fear (We're not yet in the clear) We cannot lose this game (no, no, we cannot lose this game) We cannot lose (no, no, we cannot lose this game) this game If we don't win this match, today, against House Slytherin (They are bloody vermin) Won't have another chance to play, and so we've got to win (We'll do it, my Merlin!) We cannot lose this game (no, no, we cannot lose this game) We cannot lose (no, no, we cannot lose this game) this game We cannot lose (no, no, we cannot lose this game) this ... We've got the best ruddy team in this Hogwarts school (That's 'cause we're cool) yeah If we don't win it, fate then would be cruel (guitar solo) ...we cannot lose this game... ...we cannot lose this game... We cannot lose this game (no, no, we cannot lose this game) We cannot lose (no, no, we cannot lose this game) this game We cannot lose (no, no, we cannot lose this game) this game The best Chasers, and Beaters that can't be beat (You're also neat) yeah And a fine Seeker who's not lost a meet So Harry you can't catch the Snitch 'till we're fifty points up (Till we're fifty points up) If you don't then we'll win the match but we will lose the Cup (We will not lose the Cup!) We cannot lose this game (no, no, we cannot lose this game) We cannot lose (no, no, we cannot lose this game) this game We cannot lose (no, no, we cannot lose this game)...this...game! -Gail B. From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Tue Dec 21 16:30:55 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 16:30:55 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120302 Alla wrote: "Well, even those themes of abuse, etc, I would say have a lot to do with Harry's growing up and noticing that WW is not such happy place (Duh, Harry ;o)) as he may have thought. (snip) I remember that one of the first OOP reviews was talking about symbolic meaning of "dissilusionment" charm - as Harry opening his eyes and seeing a lot of unpleasant things going on around him. I happen to agree with such POV." Del replies: I agree too. But I don't think it's that simple. IMO, we have once again run into the problem of the *narrator*'s function. I have no problem understanding that for 11-year-old Harry, the WW was magical all over, both literally and figuratively, and that as he grows up his eyes get open to the much darker reality of that world. But what I was originally protesting against wasn't the change in *Harry*'s POV : it was the change in the *narrator*'s POV. The narrator is very obviously not Harry, and it sometimes shows. At the beginning of PS/SS in particular (and still at the beginning of the next 3 books in some way), the narrator finds all the abuse the Dursleys dish out at Harry funny, and presents it in a comical fashion, even though it's quite obvious that Harry himself must not have found any of it funny! But as time goes by, as he gets to spend more and more time in Harry's shoes, the narrator starts indentifying more and more closely with Harry. On one hand, that's obviously a very good thing, because it allows *us* to relate more and more to Harry's problems, and to know better what's going on in our hero's head and heart. But on the other hand, it means that the narrator's POV is shifting throughout the series. As he becomes more and more concerned about Harry, the narrator changes his mind about such things as the Dursleys' abuse. And *that* is what makes me uncomfortable : not only do I have to deal with the fact that almost everything goes through a first filter (Harry) because the narrator tends to report things as Harry sees them, but on top of that even the narrator himself is colouring his own narrative according to his own fluctuating feelings! No wonder we can never reach an agreement as a group about anything even remotely subjective! Del From moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 21 16:48:12 2004 From: moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com (K G) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 08:48:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Usual cast of suspects (a few more added) In-Reply-To: <20041221161520.58271.qmail@web53501.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041221164812.81238.qmail@web53507.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120303 K G wrote: I made a list of the people mentioned on JKR's web site and made note of them below (I do not know if it will mean anything but maybe it will show who she sees as "main characters") 1) any of the Dursleys - not likely in my opinion as JKR has stated they will hardly be mentioned in this book. 2) Hermione and family - Hermione is mentioned on JKR's site 3) Ron - mentioned on JKR's site 4) Arthur - mentioned on JKR's site 5) Molly - mentioned on JKR's site 6) Bill 7) Charlie - mentioned on JKR's site 8) Percy - mentioned on JKR's site 9) the Twins - mentioned on JKR's site 10) Ginny - mentioned on JKR's site 11) Dumbledore 12) Snape 13) McGonnegal (I can never spell her name right) 14) Flintwick 15) Pomphrey 16) Sprout 17) Draco (who says it has to be a good guy?) - mentioned on JKR's site 18) Crabbe and Goyle 19) Lucius 20) Neville - mentioned on JKR's site 21) Dean - mentioned on JKR's site 22) Seamus (horrible spelling again) 23) Pavarti 24) Lavender 25) Hagrid 26) Lupin - mentioned on JKR's site 27) Peter - mentioned on JKR's site 28) Tonks 29) Shackelbolt 30) Moody 31) Fudge 32) Rosemerta 33) Dobby - mentioned on JKR's site 34) Filch - mentioned on JKR's site 35) Lee Jordan 36) Katie 37) Alicia 38) Angelina 39) Cho 40) Fleur 41) Krum 42) Grawp (he was just pointed out to me!!!) 43) Luna - mentioned on JKR's site 44) Oliver 45) Lestranges - mentioned on JKR's site 46) Nott - mentioned on JKR's site 47) Figg - mentioned on JKR's site 48) Frank/Alice Longbottom - Frank is mentioned on JKR's site 49) Colin - mentioned on JKR's site Okay, folks, lets narrow the list using canon and interviews. Also, am I missing anyone? moonmyyst (who is getting totally carried away with being a very bad detective) --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Meet the all-new My Yahoo! ? Try it today! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From udderpd at yahoo.co.uk Tue Dec 21 17:15:03 2004 From: udderpd at yahoo.co.uk (udder_pen_dragon) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 17:15:03 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Usual cast of suspects (a few more added) In-Reply-To: <20041221164812.81238.qmail@web53507.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041221171503.33760.qmail@web25306.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120304 UdderPD Here I am doing this slightly differently K G wrote: I made a list of the people mentioned on JKR's web site and made note of them below (I do not know if it will mean anything but maybe it will show who she sees as "main characters") a) Harry b) Voldemort 1) any of the Dursleys - not likely in my opinion as JKR has stated they will hardly be mentioned in this book. 2) Hermione and family - Hermione is mentioned on JKR's site. (JKR has said that Hermione's parents are not important) 3) Ron - mentioned on JKR's site 4) Arthur - mentioned on JKR's site 5) Molly - mentioned on JKR's site 6) Bill 7) Charlie - mentioned on JKR's site 8) Percy - mentioned on JKR's site 9) the Twins - mentioned on JKR's site 10) Ginny - mentioned on JKR's site 11) Dumbledore 12) Snape 13) McGonnegal (I can never spell her name right) McGonagall 14) Flintwick (Flitwick) 15) Pomphrey 16) Sprout 17) Draco (who says it has to be a good guy?) - mentioned on JKR's site 18) Crabbe and Goyle 19) Lucius 20) Neville - mentioned on JKR's site 21) Dean - mentioned on JKR's site 22) Seamus (horrible spelling again) (Correct spelling) 23) Pavarti 24) Lavender 25) Hagrid 26) Lupin - mentioned on JKR's site 27) Peter - mentioned on JKR's site 28) Tonks 29) Shackelbolt 30) Moody 31) Fudge 32) Rosemerta 33) Dobby - mentioned on JKR's site 34) Filch - mentioned on JKR's site 35) Lee Jordan 36) Katie 37) Alicia 38) Angelina 39) Cho 40) Fleur 41) Krum 42) Grawp (he was just pointed out to me!!!) 43) Luna - mentioned on JKR's site 44) Oliver 45) Lestranges - mentioned on JKR's site 46) Nott - mentioned on JKR's site 47) Figg - mentioned on JKR's site 48) Frank/Alice Longbottom - Frank is mentioned on JKR's site 49) Colin - mentioned on JKR's site 52) Snape 53) Lupin 54) Padma Okay, folks, lets narrow the list using canon and interviews. Also, am I missing anyone? moonmyyst (who is getting totally carried away with being a very bad detective) --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Meet the all-new My Yahoo! ? Try it today! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] 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 delwynmarch at yahoo.com Tue Dec 21 17:20:59 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 17:20:59 -0000 Subject: One last try (re: Parenting Harry (was: Re: I don't like him much)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120305 Alla wrote: "OK, I think I have an example of what kind of fairness parent should have. I think (and this is of course just my guess :o) that when your boy will grow up, he will PERFECTLY understand why you had to punish him. For him looking back at his life as an adult, he will understand the fairness of your actions (and yes, of course we all screw up SOMETIMES)." Del replies: In a perfect world, yes he would. But if I end up being like my mom (who was a great mom, but not perfect), then he will unfortunately realise that I was often unfair, that I had non-valid reasons to do some things I did, and hopefully he will have compassion on me and forgive me. That's what I had to do with my mom and with some other adults who played a significant role in my life as a child. I can do that because I know or suspect that they had my best interests in mind most of the time. But they were just human. Alla wrote: "Do you remember when Harry with Ron and Hermione were outside and Harry was reading the book and Snape came up to them and took points from Harry for reading the book outside? Ummm, what rule was Harry breaking at that moment?" Del replies: My mom would do that quite often, punish me for almost no reason, just because she was upset by something in *her* life. And scarily enough, I find myself doing the same thing to my son. People do that *all the time* : bosses to their employees, spouses to their partners, parents to their kids, kids to their parents, and so on. Even Harry does it, especially in OoP, taking out his anger or frustration on people around him. I'm not condoning that behaviour, mind you, whether in me, Harry or Snape. But we're all human, so it happens. Snape was wrong to punish Harry that time, I'm wrong to punish my son sometimes, and Harry was wrong to take out his own frustration on his friends. That's life. Alla wrote: " Do you think that if adult Harry will look back, he will think that Snape's attitude were in any shape or form fair to him?" Del replies: As Eloise keeps pointing out : who else consistently berates Harry for breaking the rules? Answer is : nobody. So strictly speaking, NOBODY is being fair to Harry. Snape is being unfair by doing ONLY that, but everybody else is being unfair by not doing it near-enough. Appropriate discipline and punishment *are* part of good parenting. For example : when Ron and Harry took the Flying Ford Anglia to go to school, Ron got Howlered by his mom. Not so for Harry. Both DD and McGonagall expressed their disappointment, but they acted very much as Headmaster and Head of House that time, definitely not as parents. Only Snape berated Harry on a personal level. Alla wrote: "Oh and of course another thing - this question could sound as rhetorical, but it is not really. Do you agree that parent has to LOVE the child? I am not talking about constantly show warm,fuzzy feelings, but just letting the child know that he/she is loved?" Del replies: You have no idea how non-rhetorical this question is to me... I have found from my research that a child *needs* to be loved. He needs it biologically, psychologically, mentally, on every level. It's more biological in an infant, and mental in a teenager, but the need is always there. And it doesn't disappear in adults either (I remember reading a study that showed that men who had had a stroke had a much better life expectancy if they *felt* loved by their wife). In fact, this issue of love is the very reason I'm so interested in Tom Riddle's potential psychopathy, but that's another post. So yes, a child needs to be loved by his parents. But unfortunately, love isn't something that can easily be summoned (don't ask, but believe me I *know* that). It is possible to force oneself to develop feelings of love, but it's very hard work. So I would not go as far as saying that a parent *must* love their child, because if they don't, that's for good reason, and as long as that reason isn't dealt with, love won't come. The Dursleys, for example, didn't fall in love with what must have been an adorable 15-month-old baby, because they had extremely deep and painful issues concerning that baby. And since they felt no inclination to deal with those issues, and nobody prompted them in that direction, love never had a chance to come. Alla wrote: " Do you think that Snape LOVES Harry?" Del replies: Probably not, but I wouldn't bet on it. I'm pretty sure the Dursleys don't love Harry, because they completely ignore him. But Snape has strong feelings for Harry, and there's no being absolutely sure that those feelings aren't so strong *precisely* because they are conflicting : love for the kid vs hate for the father, admiration for the kid vs jealousy for the father, gratitude for the kid vs resentment for the father. I'm not saying this is the way it is, I'm just expressing a possibility. There *are* parents out there who are so mixed-up emotionally that they can't express their love for their children through any other way but abuse, *especially* verbal abuse. Personal and family therapy can be a life-changing experience for those parents and their kids. But the WW seems to be blissfully ignorant of such things as therapy and counseling. So I doubt Snape loves Harry, but I wouldn't be surprised if he did. Del From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Tue Dec 21 17:36:00 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 17:36:00 -0000 Subject: One last try (re: Parenting Harry (was: Re: I don't like him much)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120306 imamommy wrote: " This becomes the departure point. You see Snape as having Harry's best interest at heart; I see Snape as being an embittered, angry man with an axe to grind. I don't think Snape disciplines Harry to groom him for society, or to help him become a better person, or to help him fight VM. I think he disciplines, or punishes, Harry because he's being vindictive towards Harry and, vicariously, James. " Del replies: Strictly speaking, I don't see Snape as anything definite. We don't know anywhere enough about Snape for me to have a definite opinion about him. I was just pointing out that some of the disparate elements we know about him can be construed to indicate that he does have *some* of Harry's best interests at heart. If I were forced to choose, I would probably choose your camp, because it's the one that is statistically the most probable at this point in the series. But since we're talking about a *JKR* character, I am not willing to cancel out any possibility, no matter how remote. She *did* make the DE-hating trustee ex-Auror there to protect Harry, turn out to be a supposedly dead DE planning Harry's death, after all... Del From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Tue Dec 21 17:42:02 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 17:42:02 -0000 Subject: Death Eaters In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120307 Potioncat wrote: "You mean, like in a large tank in a special room?" Del replies: I'm not the only one, huh? That does put a nice twist on the purpose of the Brain Room. Could it be, for example, that the MoM tries to collect the brains of all the powerful witches and wizards who die, so that the Death Eaters can't get to them? Though I guess if that was the case, the DEs would have taken the opportunity to raid that tank, when they invaded the DoM. Still, I find it a nice little coincidence... Del From jjpandy at yahoo.com Tue Dec 21 17:48:41 2004 From: jjpandy at yahoo.com (jjpandy) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 17:48:41 -0000 Subject: 3 of the questions from the website Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120308 There are 3 questions (not really riddles like the other 3) that each ask for a specific answer that can be found in the books. Each questions' answer is only mentioned once throughout all 5 books - perhaps these answers are "portkeys" to bring us to 3 specific chapters that JKR wants us to reread carefully to prepare ourselves for Book 6! JJPandy From severelysigune at yahoo.co.uk Tue Dec 21 17:54:39 2004 From: severelysigune at yahoo.co.uk (severelysigune) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 17:54:39 -0000 Subject: Death Eaters In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120309 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: Potioncat wrote: <<"You mean, like in a large tank in a special room?">> Del replied: < I'm not the only one, huh? That does put a nice twist on the purpose of the Brain Room. Could it be, for example, that the MoM tries to collect the brains of all the powerful witches and wizards who die, so that the Death Eaters can't get to them? Though I guess if that was the case, the DEs would have taken the opportunity to raid that tank, when they invaded the DoM. Still, I find it a nice little coincidence... > Sigune: Or, as Potioncat's question suggests to me, it puts a nice twist on the Ministry's attitude towards and the definition of Dark Arts... Does the Ministry collect brains to keep them from the Death Eaters' reach, or rather to use them for their own ends (which seems more likely to me)? And indeed, whose brains are these? Can they just be claimed from some person, living or dead? Or are they the wizarding version of articifial intelligence in development? The Department of Mysteries is certainly aptly named :-). Yours severely, Sigune From sherriola at earthlink.net Tue Dec 21 18:16:16 2004 From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 11:16:16 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] 3 of the questions from the website In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <005601c4e789$2a5cd800$0400a8c0@pensive> No: HPFGUIDX 120310 There are 3 questions (not really riddles like the other 3) that each ask for a specific answer that can be found in the books. Each questions' answer is only mentioned once throughout all 5 books - perhaps these answers are "portkeys" to bring us to 3 specific chapters that JKR wants us to reread carefully to prepare ourselves for Book 6! JJPandy Sherry now Could you post those three questions here? Without the answers, of course. would it be considered canon? I cannot access the flash part of the web site, because I use screen reading software, and it can only read text. This kind of thing isn't usually put on the text only site. thanks. Sherry From carla68 at adelphia.net Tue Dec 21 15:07:38 2004 From: carla68 at adelphia.net (Carla) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 10:07:38 -0500 Subject: Christmas Riddles In-Reply-To: <1103631286.3968.11076.m12@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120311 Adi wrote: "I can't figure out how corned beef sandwich will be helpful but maybe it suggests that Ron won't have much to do in the next book" Perhaps there will be an Imposter!Ron who can only be sussed out by rejecting the offering of a corned beef sandwich? ~Carla From gbannister10 at aol.com Tue Dec 21 18:51:22 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 18:51:22 -0000 Subject: First Riddle on JKR's website (Website Spoiler See it yourself First ) In-Reply-To: <20041221160807.50021.qmail@web52008.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120312 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Bee Chase wrote: > Luckdragon: > I looked up the origin of corned beef and found it was a dish served in Ireland which was more likely to be served to a king than the people? Hmmm... Geoff: That's an unusual take on corned beef. To most Brits, corned beef is chopped beef presrved in brine (that's the "corned" bit) and pressed into tins. Those of us (just) old enough to remember Second World War and early post-war food, it was part of out staple diet, which is why I can't stand the stuff nowadays! From moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 21 19:02:02 2004 From: moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com (K G) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 11:02:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] 3 of the questions from the website SPOILERS!!! In-Reply-To: <005601c4e789$2a5cd800$0400a8c0@pensive> Message-ID: <20041221190202.26523.qmail@web53501.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120313 Sherry Gomes wrote: Could you post those three questions here? Without the answers, of course. would it be considered canon? I cannot access the flash part of the web site, because I use screen reading software, and it can only read text. This kind of thing isn't usually put on the text only site. thanks. Sherry here are all 6 questions without the answers: 1) Over which British city did the one-year-old Harry Potter fall asleep as Hagrid took him to number four, Privet Drive? 2) Two in a whole and four in a pair, And six in a trio, you see? And eight's a quartet, but what you must get is the name that fits just one of me. 3) What form does Hermione Granger's patronus take? 4) I cannot be other than what I am Until the man who made me dies. Power and glory will fall to me, finally, Only when he last closes his eyes. 5) Say you'd never seek to loose me While you live we cannot part I must dwell lifelong inside you Locked within your beating heart. 6) What is Ronald Weasley's least favorite sandwich filling? Hope this helps. Let us know if you see anything that we are missing. moonmyyst --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From xmezumiiru at yahoo.com Tue Dec 21 19:24:57 2004 From: xmezumiiru at yahoo.com (An'nai Jiriki) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 11:24:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] 3 of the questions from the website SPOILERS!!! In-Reply-To: <20041221190202.26523.qmail@web53501.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041221192457.20293.qmail@web12207.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120314 --- K G wrote: > Sherry Gomes wrote: > 2) Two in a whole and four in a pair, > > And six in a trio, you see? > > And eight's a quartet, but what you must get > > is the name that fits just one of me. > Would saying a 'bra' be too adult for JKR? HeeHee... Anyhoo, am I the only one to think it odd that the riddles can be answered with parts of a human and the questions answered with animals or animal related? (Assuming KG wrote the questions in order as they appear) The answers flip-flop human and animal. Mayhaps this is a clue that the HBP is not human, but a hybrid or sorts. Mezu ===== "You irritate me. Kill me now." ~Javert, Les Miserables __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Dress up your holiday email, Hollywood style. Learn more. http://celebrity.mail.yahoo.com From moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 21 19:33:04 2004 From: moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com (K G) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 11:33:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] 3 of the questions from the website SPOILERS!!! In-Reply-To: <20041221192457.20293.qmail@web12207.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041221193304.22360.qmail@web53502.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120315 An'nai Jiriki wrote: Anyhoo, am I the only one to think it odd that the riddles can be answered with parts of a human and the questions answered with animals or animal related? (Assuming KG wrote the questions in order as they appear) The answers flip-flop human and animal. Mayhaps this is a clue that the HBP is not human, but a hybrid or sorts. Mezu You get the questions in a different order each time. The first time I went in, the Hermione question was first. The order of my first set of answers (I wrote them down): spoilers otter, blood, half, Bristol, prince, corned beef moonmyyst --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Find what you need with new enhanced search. Learn more. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From EyeMelodius at hotmail.com Tue Dec 21 19:39:51 2004 From: EyeMelodius at hotmail.com (annunathradien) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 19:39:51 -0000 Subject: Hermione and DU (was: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 33 - Fight and Flight) In-Reply-To: <200412071321910.SM01064@devbox> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120316 > Vivamus wrote: > Tammy, you are absolutely right that they are different in all those areas. > DU is all of those things, and Hermione is not. But when it comes to > respecting other people's boundaries, I think they have a similar blindness. I agree. Hermione didn't bother questioning any other House Elves whether they wanted to be liberated or not, she just forces liberation upon them... and poor Dobby was cleaning Gryffindor Tower all alone because of her damn House Elf hats tossed everywhere. Which is why I'm anxiously waiting Harry tell her (hopefully in HBP) what her Hats have been doing to poor Dobby. Perhaps this combined with her disastrous foot-in-mouth disease with the Centaurs in OOTP will get her to rethink some things. I do think Hermione has the right sort of idea in the inclusion of House Elves in common liberties and unity, but she's going about it in a terribly heavy-handed sort of way. I don't remember the exact quotes, I don't have the book with me, but wasn't there some dialogue between Lavender/Parvati and Hermione in regards to Firenze that could tie into this? Lavender teasing Hermione betting she regrets quitting Divination (now that handsome Firenze is teaching it), Hermione replies with, "I never much cared for horses." I always thought this statement rather drummed in Hermione's "Umbridge-ness". It's a very dismissive comment. Firenze is anything but just some horse. He's far beyond. > Just as Harry and LV have many similarities, even though they are radically > different I actually think Harry might have a few similarities to Fudge too (although no doubt the LV/Harry parallels are also there). Both tend to depend too much on aide / advice from others. Although both Fudge and Harry were - in their own ways - warring against Dumbledore throughout OOTP, neither of which can seem to really function without Dumbledore's aide (or perhaps in some cases, control/manipulation). DD pulls Fudge's strings just like he pulls Harry's. In the case of Fudge and Umbridge (the seeming control she has over him), Hermione does seem to have a similar sort of persuasive ability with Harry. Certain things in OOTP seemed to be more Umbridge's doing than they did Fudge... Fudge a mere puppet to those smarter/more powerful around him. Umbridge really seemed the brains in Fudge's regime... as Hermione is Harry's "conscience". Of course, a seeming difference between Umbridge and Hermione is that Umbridge seemed to have her own operations going on behind Fudge's back (seemingly for the good of the Ministry). Sending the Dementors to Privet Drive to name one thing. Perhaps trying to get Sybil *prophetess* Trelawney fired too. I'd hate to think Hermione has done / is doing anything behind Harry's/Dumbledore's back we have yet to learn ... but I suppose you never know what JKR could write. ~Annu From klekatgirl at yahoo.com Tue Dec 21 19:40:17 2004 From: klekatgirl at yahoo.com (Karen) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 19:40:17 -0000 Subject: Usual cast of suspects In-Reply-To: <20041221155839.38711.qmail@web53509.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120317 I think that the main character who will die in this book will be Dumbledore. He has been doing his best to keep Harry safe and supporting him, but there has to come a point where Harry faces Voldemort totally on his own. I think that HBP will end with Dumbledore telling Harry almost everything and then towards the end he'll die. That leaves the whole last book for Harry to face Voldemort on his own. Then he'll figure out everything else we need to know and what happens next is a totally different thing to discuss. Is there any clues in the books to back up my theory? I really don't have any to site this, it is just my opinion. Karen Evans From xmezumiiru at yahoo.com Tue Dec 21 20:00:41 2004 From: xmezumiiru at yahoo.com (An'nai Jiriki) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 12:00:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] 3 of the questions from the website SPOILERS!!! In-Reply-To: <20041221193304.22360.qmail@web53502.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041221200041.92491.qmail@web12206.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120318 --- K G wrote: > An'nai Jiriki wrote: > Anyhoo, am I the only one to think it odd that the > riddles can be answered with parts of a human and > the > questions answered with animals or animal related? > (Assuming KG wrote the questions in order as they > appear) The answers flip-flop human and animal. > Mayhaps this is a clue that the HBP is not human, > but > a hybrid or sorts. > KG: > You get the questions in a different order each > time. The first time I went in, the Hermione > question was first. The order of my first set of > answers (I wrote them down): > > > > spoilers > > > > > > otter, blood, half, Bristol, prince, corned beef > My answers would be: otter, blood, [legs, breasts, hands, eyes, etc.], Bristol (when I did a search of the town I was amazed how many animal attractions came up, especially migratory birds), soul or spirit, corned beef ===== "You irritate me. Kill me now." ~Javert, Les Miserables __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 250MB free storage. Do more. Manage less. http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250 From ohneill_2001 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 21 20:21:13 2004 From: ohneill_2001 at yahoo.com (ohneill_2001) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 20:21:13 -0000 Subject: Usual cast of suspects In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120319 Karen wrote: > Is there any clues in the books to back up my theory? I > really don't have any to site this, it is just my opinion. > > Now Cory: I'm no good at predicting specifics, but in terms of the big picture, I agree that Dumbledore is most likely going to die. I don't have my books with me to cite canon, but throughout the books, there have been constant references to the fact that everything is going to be fine as long as Dumbledore is around. ("Howarts is safe as long as Dumbledore is here; Dumbledore is the only one Voldemort ever feared, etc.") Therefore it only makes sense that Dumbledore not be around for the final showdown. I would view Dumbledore as a parent figure to Harry; he's been keeping Harry safe from Voldemort all this time. At its heart, this story is about Harry's journey from childhood to adulthood, and forcing Harry to finally face Voldemort without Dumbledore's help or guidance will represent Harry's final step into adulthood. --Cory From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Tue Dec 21 21:32:06 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 21:32:06 -0000 Subject: Death Eaters In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120320 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: > > Potioncat wrote: > "You mean, like in a large tank in a special room?" > > Del replies: > I'm not the only one, huh? > > That does put a nice twist on the purpose of the Brain Room. Could it > be, for example, that the MoM tries to collect the brains of all the > powerful witches and wizards who die, so that the Death Eaters can't > get to them? Though I guess if that was the case, the DEs would have > taken the opportunity to raid that tank, when they invaded the DoM. > > Still, I find it a nice little coincidence... > There's this disease... called Kuru, still occasionally found in the New Guinea highlands, I believe. Severe neurological disorders, emotional lability, death in about a year. Transmitted during cannabalistic rites .... only found in males and it's only the males that eat the brains. Probably a prion-like agent as in CJD. Is it wishful thinking, or is Voldy showing symptoms? Dunno if anyone else has mentioned it in the thread but they weren't originally called Death Eaters; they were called the Knights of Walpurgis (Paxman interview last year) and there's an awful lot of backstory on them. Whether we're going to see it is iffy by all accounts. Names seem to have significance to our author, but I'm damned if I can tease anything worthwhile out of either of these - DE can't be tied to anything specific and Walpurgis Night is a big holiday in Nordic countries (30th April). Sure, there's some old folklore about witches meeting in Sabbats on that night, but it's pretty run of the mill stuff. If there's that much backstory then I'd bet the name does tie in somehow - initiation rites maybe? Linked to the Dark Mark? Let's face it, we're guessing. Kneasy From r.v.oldridge at herts.ac.uk Tue Dec 21 16:29:49 2004 From: r.v.oldridge at herts.ac.uk (lrcxrvo) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 16:29:49 -0000 Subject: Did Fred and George mark themselves? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120321 Eilis: > was this after Voldie possesed Quirrell? I think > he fused himself to Q sometime in the spring I'm sure Quirrell was possessed from the first day of the school year, when Harry felt his scar hurt while looking at Snape/the back of Quirrell's head. R From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 21 22:21:19 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 22:21:19 -0000 Subject: Liking Snape (Was: Parenting Harry) In-Reply-To: <20041219220641.61285.qmail@web53103.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120322 Juli wrote: > I love Harry and I cry when he cries and laugh when he > laughs, but do I think Snape is a SOB? ABSOLUTELY NOT. > He'a just not your typical guy who loves Harry and > treats him like a Hero, Snape isn't always nice, I > think we all agree on that, but is he evil? no way. > Does he hate Harry? I don't think so. > > Snape is just like so many characters, he may not be > the lovable guy you always fall for, but eventually > you start to like him, I know I have. I like Snape > just the way he is, I'd hate it if all of a sudden he > starts hugging Harry and Neville. And I'm not going to > stop reading the books. Carol responds: I realize that I'm not typical in my response to Snape, which is only slightly ambivalent and generally favorable. I think that his "abuse" of Harry is minimal and does Harry no lasting harm, and that while he does take pleasure in it, he also believes that he is doing Harry a service, either preventing him from becoming arrogant like his father or trying to force him to follow the rules to keep him out of danger. That is, almost certainly, one of the roles assigned him by Dumbledore. It's no accident that Snape is prowling the halls at all hours in every book. Snape teaches in the only way he knows, as he has himself been taught. As I've said many times, there are no schools of education in the WW, and political correctness has barely raised its head in the form of a single well-meaning Muggleborn know-it-all named Hermione--and the calm personal tolerance of Albus Dumbledore. Snape reflects the values of the WW in his views on everything from werewolves and to discipline. Course content matters; the students' emotional well-being is not even considered. At any rate, I was thoroughly outraged by Umbridge's brutality, but Snape's sniping is a life lesson that the students had better learn to cope with while they're still in school; they'll be facing much worse in the outside world even when the war is over. (As a side note, IMO, we modern Muggles do our children no favors when we overprotect them and teach them to value their "inner beauty" rather than to respect authority and the rights of others.) Harry has to be aware of his limitations in order to overcome them. At any rate, what makes Snape intriguing, for me, is that despite his Slytherin instincts, he is siding with Dumbledore against his natural friends and allies. Consider his upbringing before Hogwarts (so far as we can guess from the glimpse we've had of his parents and his precocious knowledge of hexes); consider how the values he had been taught at home would have been reinforced in Slytherin. How unsurprising that a boy like that, especially a highly intelligent and talented one, would have been recruited by the Death Eaters. But how strange, how astonishing, that while still a very young man he would have rejected Lord Voldemort and turned spy for Dumbledore "at great personal risk." A courageous Slytherin! A cunning and ambitious supporter of Dumbledore! Snape, in my view, is a fascinating mixture of contradictions, and both his courage and his loyalty to Dumbledore are admirable particularly given what we know of the typical Slytherin mentality (self-preservation and the end justifies the means). JKR has said that we should not take Snape at face value, that there is more to him than meets the eye. I, for one, am very curious to discover what she means by that. Carol, who needs to get back to her Christmas cards, which as usual will arrive on approximately the Third Day of Christmas if she's lucky From manawydan at ntlworld.com Tue Dec 21 22:24:40 2004 From: manawydan at ntlworld.com (manawydan) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 22:24:40 -0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Theoretical boundaries References: <1103592224.18271.44351.m22@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <001401c4e7ab$de9d6f60$704b6d51@f3b7j4> No: HPFGUIDX 120323 Kneasy wrote: >Where I start to get restive is when, for example a thread starts and >suddenly there's a load of posts castigating the Dursleys. Sure, they're >But so far as I'm concerned the Dursleys POV could be important to >the overall story - just possibly. >Why do they treat Harry the way they do? >Is there, in their own eyes at least, some sort of twisted justification? >There could be. What if it's not hate but fear? Fear of anything >magical. What if they fear magic as much as say, the wizard in Quite so. They started off as cartoon figures, but there have always been a whole lot of questions underlying exactlyl why they are the way they are. Mostly because the Dursley's aren't benign or even disinterested in the WW (as you might expect from the fact that there are a whole lot of Muggle relatives out there who could blow the gaff on wizardry if they were inclined to chatter about it), they are actively hostile. Why is that? What was the relationship between Lily and Petunia when she met Vernon? What was Vernon's take on the matter? _Did_ something nasty happen to the Evans family as a result of Voldemort's rebellion? And what's been said since? Like you, I swiftly pass over posts where people get upset because their own moral values aren't met by people in the Potterverse, I'd far rather try to understand the characters from their own perspectives and those of the world that they live in (which at least for wizards are completely alien to our own) than to get umpty because some of them would fall foul of the authorities in our world. Cheers Ffred O Benryn wleth hyd Luch Reon Cymru yn unfryd gerhyd Wrion Gwret dy Cymry yghymeiri From ibotsjfvxfst at yahoo.co.uk Tue Dec 21 22:33:59 2004 From: ibotsjfvxfst at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?Hans=20Andr=E9a?=) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 22:33:59 +0000 (GMT) Subject: character discussion: introduction Message-ID: <20041221223359.75051.qmail@web25106.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120324 Before starting the discussion of the main characters I want to explain the basic premise behind my theory of the spiritual foundation of Harry Potter. Centuries ago there was no universal, free education and the human intellect was not developed to the extent it is today. The masses were more or less in a state of semi-slavery or serfdom and in any case without mechanisation there wasn't much time to think about anything. The exceptions were the aristocracy and the clergy and a few rich merchants etc. Nor was it easy to communicate with other people without modern postal services etc. Even as recently as 50 years ago people generally had no trouble with the idea of "do as you're told!" For example it never entered the heads of children at school to disobey their teachers, and that attitude prevailed until very recently. Obedience was instilled during childhood and stayed during adulthood. "Ours is not to reason why, ours is but to do and die". People were just very obedient and they didn't question the whys and wherefores of life. It was the same thing in the churches. People were told what to think and the priest or minister knew what was right for his people. "Don't ask questions!" People in the middle ages couldn't read, and later when people started to learn to read, the Catholic Church actively discouraged people from reading the Bible until recently. That's our heritage: ignorance, obedience, acceptance of authority. This is not our heritage: think for yourself, experiment, read, discuss, argue with your religious or intellectual superiors. These things are very recent developments in terms of human history. In addition, until recently people generally had a very different consciousness than we have today. Most of us are very self-conscious in the sense of being aware of ourselves as individualised entities. Before and right through the middle ages people had more of a collective type of consciousness. They were conscious of being part of a group, a tribe, a family, a guild, a clan etc. They were regarded and treated as such by others. The renaissance brought the first signs of change, but that was only among the intellectuals and the aristocracy. Today many people in western countries are almost totally individualised but of course in some societies people are still group-conscious to some extent. A good book on this is "The Identity Society" by William Glasser. The point I'm trying to make is that presenting humanity with abstract concepts to enable people to go the path of liberation would have been a waste of time until very recently, assuming that people would even have wanted to go that Path. And yet those people I call the Masters of Compassion made attempts to help people absorb these highly abstract spiritual concepts albeit subconsciously. They did this by introducing into the world the facts of liberation in the form of stories using symbols and PERSONIFICATION. Basically there is only ONE story: the Fall from the Real World, our present (self-)imprisonment, and the return journey to the Real World. The Brotherhood of Liberation, the Lohans, the Communion of Saints, the Brotherhood of Shamballa, call them what you like, has sent into the world innumerable stories, gospels, fairy tales, fables, myths, legends, epic poems, etc. to drive into the collective unconscious of millions of people the Great Trilogy (I just invented that term). Each of these stories uses the same technique: personification and symbolism. And so we have the great epics and gospels: King Arthur, the Holy Grail, the Wendidad, Grimm's Fairy Tales, the Greek legends, the Song of the Pearl, the New Testament, etc. AND: HARRY POTTER! Despite the fact that we can now ask questions, challenge authorities, change religion every week if we want to, divorce our parents, you name it, you can do it, Harry Potter uses the same symbols and personification as all the old stories given to humanity by the Masters of Compassion. There is hardly anything new in Harry Potter as far as symbolism and personification goes. Of course there couldn't be, because if there were, it wouldn't resonate in the subconscious so powerfully. But one thing has changed: people are more individualised, as described above. Harry Potter speaks to children because they are open to these symbols and archetypes of the collective subconscious. Many adults also are enchanted by Harry's heroic journey. But so far few people have really woken up to what Harry Potter is really about. However the point is, today people CAN understand the process of alchemical liberation. People CAN see that there is only one way to change the mess we're in: self-revolution. This is the superhuman genius behind Harry Potter: first invade the world with a hero everyone can fall in love with, and his epic struggle for liberation. Cram this story full of symbols, archetypes and personification. And gradually some people will wake up to what's really going on: that Harry Potter is a new attempt by our elder brothers and sisters to help us realise we've fallen out of the Real World, we're imprisoned in a closed off part of the universe, and there IS a way back. That's the hidden agenda of Harry Potter, but it's an agenda of love and compassion, of insight into reality, and of true faith, hope and love. It's a great conspiracy to help us go the return journey to the Real World, to Nirvana, to Tao, to the Kingdom of Heaven, to Shamballa. Until now only a few people have cottoned on to the fact that this is not the Real World and that we're being hoodwinked into thinking our life here on earth is all there is. Now to get back to the "method behind the madness" of Harry potter: personification is the way to turn highly abstract forces, influences and aspects of the process of liberation into understandable concrete characters that we can identify with and love. If you want to understand my theory that Harry Potter is an allegory of the process of liberation, you have to realise that we as a person have many voices speaking into our mental ears. There are not only the voices of good and evil, but also of our culture, our ancestors, and of the Coming New Man who is born in the heart as the result of taking the first step on the Path: Harry James Potter. In addition please also keep in mind the precept from "The Emerald Tablet" of Hermes Trismegistus: "As above, so below". The human microcosm has the same basic structure as the cosmos around us, i.e. the world. The Great Trilogy applies both to our own life as well as the life of humanity in general. I'll come back to that later in the series. In my first character discussion I'll introduce to you: Lily Evans-Potter. Remember: she's not a real person but an abstract influence in our lives. But just because something is abstract it doesn't mean it's not real. Lily is extremely real and immensely powerful, as I hope I'll be able to prove! 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 lilyp at superig.com.br Tue Dec 21 17:52:57 2004 From: lilyp at superig.com.br (lilypo2007) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 17:52:57 -0000 Subject: Usual cast of suspects (a few more added) In-Reply-To: <20041221171503.33760.qmail@web25306.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120325 > K G wrote: > I made a list of the people mentioned on JKR's web site and made note of > them below (I do not know if it will mean anything but maybe it will show > who she sees as "main characters") > > a) Harry > > b) Voldemort > > 1) any of the Dursleys - not likely in my opinion as JKR has stated they > will hardly be mentioned in this book. > > 2) Hermione and family - Hermione is mentioned on JKR's site. (JKR has > said that Hermione's parents are not important) > > 3) Ron - mentioned on JKR's site > > 4) Arthur - mentioned on JKR's site > > 5) Molly - mentioned on JKR's site > > 6) Bill > > 7) Charlie - mentioned on JKR's site > > 8) Percy - mentioned on JKR's site > > 9) the Twins - mentioned on JKR's site > > 10) Ginny - mentioned on JKR's site > > 11) Dumbledore > > 12) Snape > > 13) McGonnegal (I can never spell her name right) McGonagall > > 14) Flintwick (Flitwick) > > 15) Pomphrey > > 16) Sprout > > 17) Draco (who says it has to be a good guy?) - mentioned on JKR's site > > 18) Crabbe and Goyle > > 19) Lucius > > 20) Neville - mentioned on JKR's site > > 21) Dean - mentioned on JKR's site > > 22) Seamus (horrible spelling again) (Correct spelling) > > 23) Pavarti > > 24) Lavender > > 25) Hagrid > > 26) Lupin - mentioned on JKR's site > > 27) Peter - mentioned on JKR's site > > 28) Tonks > > 29) Shackelbolt > > 30) Moody > > 31) Fudge > > 32) Rosemerta > > 33) Dobby - mentioned on JKR's site > > 34) Filch - mentioned on JKR's site > > 35) Lee Jordan > > 36) Katie > > 37) Alicia > > 38) Angelina > > 39) Cho > > 40) Fleur > > 41) Krum > > 42) Grawp (he was just pointed out to me!!!) > > 43) Luna - mentioned on JKR's site > > 44) Oliver > > 45) Lestranges - mentioned on JKR's site > > 46) Nott - mentioned on JKR's site > > 47) Figg - mentioned on JKR's site > > 48) Frank/Alice Longbottom - Frank is mentioned on JKR's site > > 49) Colin - mentioned on JKR's site > > 52) Snape > > 53) Lupin > > 54) Padma > > > Okay, folks, lets narrow the list using canon and interviews. Also, am I > missing anyone? First, I'd like to notice that when JKR said about new deaths in HBP, she didn't say it was a very known character. And of course there'll be deaths. There is a war going on. I'll add my 2 knuts. 55) The Creeveys - I think at least one of them will die, because they are mentioned a lot, but have no real role ubtil now. 55) Sturgis Podmore - What has happened to him? Lilyp From jennifer_maccherone at yahoo.com Tue Dec 21 18:58:01 2004 From: jennifer_maccherone at yahoo.com (jennifer_maccherone) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 18:58:01 -0000 Subject: Flitwick the HBP? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120326 Forgive me if someone else has put this forth - I haven't seen it. Could Flitwick be the HBP? He could be half elf. He is small and obviously good at charms. Also, Filius means son, and a prince is a son of a king. He wouldn't be the only half-blood professor. Niffer From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 21 23:10:11 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 23:10:11 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries In-Reply-To: <001401c4e7ab$de9d6f60$704b6d51@f3b7j4> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120327 FFred: snip. ...I'd far rather try to understand the characters from their own perspectives and those of the world that they live in (which at least for wizards are completely alien to our own) than to get umpty because some of them would fall foul of the authorities in our world. Alla: You see, I am of the opinion that WW values are MUCH closer or WILL be closer to ours than JKR lets on. If I thought that that world is indeed so different from ours , I would read those books quite differently. But I think there IS a reason why JKR keeps saying that she does not believe in magic and that we will have to wait and see what happnes at the end. I think there IS a reason why despite the fact that to majority of her peers Hermione looks quite annoying with her SPEW efforts , JKR just won't let it go. I think there IS a reason why despite the all around discrimination of werewolves, we know of one werewolf who was allowed to attend Hogwarts and one headmaster who made it possible I think that constant presence of the phoenix in the series IS the hint that WW will undergo radical change in the moral, ethical sense. See Pip's wonderful post. This is the only part of MD, which I strongly agree with. What am I getting it? Oh, yes, I think that at the end of it all, WW will be VERY close to the moral values of us, muggles or actually to the moral values of the "potterverse" creator. But it is just my opinion, of course and I can be very wrong. Alla, who just like everybody else cannot wait till July 16 comes. :o) From darkmark90 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 21 20:59:43 2004 From: darkmark90 at yahoo.com (darkmark90) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 20:59:43 -0000 Subject: Usual cast of suspects In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120328 Cory wrote: > I'm no good at predicting specifics, but in terms of the big > picture, I agree that Dumbledore is most likely going to die. > throughout the books, there have been constant > references to the fact that everything is going to be fine as > long as Dumbledore is around. > > Therefore it only makes sense that Dumbledore not be around > for the final showdown. I would view Dumbledore as a parent > figure to Harry; he's been keeping Harry safe from Voldemort > all this time. At its heart, this story is about Harry's > journey from childhood to adulthood, and forcing Harry to > finally face Voldemort without Dumbledore's help or guidance > will represent Harry's final step into adulthood. I think this has a good chance of being correct, from a dramatic point of view. Couching this in terms of a Western: if Harry was a deputy being trained by a sheriff, and the point of the story was that Harry was going to have to face an outlaw in a final fight at the end of the saga ("High Noon", anyone?), sooner or later the sheriff would have to be taken out of the picture so that the deputy would have to stand on his own two feet against the bad guy. That's probably what's going to happen here. Also combine that with the feeling of sympathy when / if Dumbledore buys it. He's of the older generation, and probably not far, symbolically, from passing on; the readership would accept that far more than they would accept the deaths of Hermione or Ron, who are young and closer to Harry than the old wizard. If either of the two kids died, the readership would be up in arms, taking up picks, shovels, and clubs, and making pilgrimages to JKR's home just so she could give them directions as to where Voldemort was so they could kill him. If Dumbledore died, we'd be sad and mournful, but we'd accept it more easily, and we'd be ready for Book Seven with an air of, "Harry---go get 'im!" No clues, but I write, and the dramatics of the situation seem self- explanatory to me. And I'm a reader who really loves Dumbledore. dm From Elvishooked at hotmail.com Tue Dec 21 23:15:13 2004 From: Elvishooked at hotmail.com (Inge) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 23:15:13 -0000 Subject: Doesn't she know? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120329 This may have been brought up before. If so, sorry for repeating stuff. The headline of this post was written with a smile (just so that you know....) ! I found this map of Hogwarts / Hogsmeade that Rowling made for the POA movie - and much to my surprise I had to wonder: "How wrong she is - doesn't she know better?" I know - I know.... it's her story etc. etc. etc. Of course she knows best. But! (and here's the link http://users.atw.hu/mkepek/galleries/filmek/azkaban/extra/038_by_jkr.j pg (hope it works?) - why does she place the Whomping Willow on the route from the castle to Hagrids hut? Is that really where the tree is? If so - why didn't anyone warn the 1st years to be aware of the dangerous tree? And why is it that Harry and friends never mention it prior to hitting it with the Ford Anglia? Curious! Very curious! I compared Rowlings map to the one by Steve (Lexicon) and found Steve's version much more to my own liking. Here the Willow is placed so that you don't have to pass it to get from the castle to Hagrid's - but also closer to Hogsmeade than on Rowling's map - which I find more beliveable because of the tree's use as a tunnel for Lupin - back in the old days of course. On Rowling's map the Lake is placed 'behind' the castle. Meaning that Hogsmeade is to the north of the castle while the Lake is south of the castle. Now that seems odd - because 1st years go by boat from Hogsmeade - crossing the Lake and beneath the castle. Rowling putting the Lake the way she did in the map the 1st years would have to go all the way around the castle to get to the Lake - only to sail back again..... that doesn't make much sense - does it? Once again - comparing to Steve's version. He placed the Lake BETWEEN Hogsmeade and the castle which is more convincing when considered 1st years by boat. So my question once again (with yet another smile) - doesn't she know? Inge From klevasseur at earthlink.net Tue Dec 21 21:44:02 2004 From: klevasseur at earthlink.net (ms_luna_knows) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 21:44:02 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries In-Reply-To: <20041221024745.97259.qmail@web53502.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120330 > Lupinlore: > Oh, I think that is perfectly plausible, although Harry seems to > have grown up in an awfully big spurt. > > Moonmyyst: > IMO, the events in the graveyard were enough to make ANYONE grow > up rather quickly. > > I found OOTP to be a very ...uncomfortable... book. But then, I > felt the same way about that period in my life. (But then, as my > son reminds me, the dinosaurs could have had a hand in that!!) Moon, you gave me a great belly laugh with your line about the dinosaurs..Good one!!! I also agree that events in the graveyard were enough to make Harry grow up, but I also think that there is more to it, such as the teenager's angst that has exploded in him during the OOP, made more explosive by the graveyard events. Because IMO what makes the last book so uncomfortable to read was Harry's VERY hormone induced, teenage way of "handling" things...I kept asking myself why doesn't Harry do this or that to relieve his "guilt/attitude"....but the hormones have kidnapped his brain and he can do nothing without that getting in his way. (I know, I live with a 13 year old boy/teenager who thinks he can "handle" things.) Ms. Luna From iris_ft at yahoo.fr Tue Dec 21 23:54:23 2004 From: iris_ft at yahoo.fr (iris_ft) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 23:54:23 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries In-Reply-To: <001401c4e7ab$de9d6f60$704b6d51@f3b7j4> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120332 Kneasy wrote: "Rarely do either camp dig deeper or consider the situation from the Dursleys point of view. But so far as I'm concerned the Dursleys POV could be important to the overall story - just possibly. Why do they treat Harry the way they do? Is there, in their own eyes at least, some sort of twisted justification? There could be. What if it's not hate but fear? Fear of anything magical. What if they fear magic as much as say, the wizard in the street fears Voldy? How would you expect them to react with a magical cuckoo thrust into their nest? Paranoia and denial, I'd think, just as they do now - especially as there's absolutely *nobody* they can talk to, nobody they can turn to. And if it turns out that Petunia's parents were casualties in the first Voldy unpleasantness then it'd be even more understandable. Certainly we now know that DD was in communication with Petunia *before* GH. This would indicate that maybe she's had contacts with the WW other than through her sister. So what happened? And did it help form her attitudes? And through her Vernon's? Just the sort of thing I like to wonder about. See, when I read the books I don't see them as presented as evil, I read them as held up to ridicule, a joke presentation of pompous conformity. As slight support I'd add that's the way they're shown in the films too. JKR has said that the character she dislikes most is Vernon, but she's never said why. Is it because of his reaction to Harry, or is it bigger, that he's the embodiment of unthinking middle- class ignorance? Guess which I'd go for? ? Iris : I agree with Kneasy when he says Vernon is the embodiment of ignorance, but I'd like to add that ignorance isn't the privilege of the sole "unthinking middle class". The Dursleys abuse Harry because he's different, and that kind of behaviour ignores social classes. Moreover, they do it with their neighbours' and Harry's teachers' tacit complicity. Harry wears old clothes and broken glasses; he's skinny and underfed. It's noticeable. It's obvious they don't treat him well. But they send him to school, with their son Dudley. But they leave him at Mrs Figg's. Are the Dursleys stupid? Don't they realize that people will necessarily see the difference between the two boys? And why don't the neighbours or the teachers react? In my opinion (and of course, it's just one point of view amongst many others), the Dursleys picture more than ignorance. It's only one aspect of a more complex problem. They picture normality led to such an extreme point that it becomes monstrous, and leads to intolerance. And their willing ignorance is only the manifestation of their thirst of normality (take `normality' as belonging to a group, not necessarily the middle-class, and sharing with it the same ideas or behaviours). In their case, normality becomes an obsession, and then it becomes abnormal. Is it why JKR writes the Dursleys using caricature? In PS/SS, Aunt Petunia calls her sister a freak and says Harry is abnormal (chapter 4). They are different from her. However, she behaves herself as a freak and as an abnormal person towards her nephew (she's ridiculous, I agree, but at the same time rather monstrous as a woman, IMO). What seems the most important according to the Dursleys is their reputation, their public image. They want their neighbours to consider them as `respectable normal people', and no matter if they behave like monsters when their door is locked, as long as it serves their reputation and helps them belong to the group. Harry being as abnormal as possible (a wizard boy! In Privet Drive!), they try to pretend he isn't, and they even try to act as if he didn't exist, locking him into a dark cupboard. On the other hand, the neighbours and the teachers don't react, or they even believe what the Dursleys tell them (for example, that Harry is a delinquent boy) because they don't want to loose their own comfortable normality. They close their eyes to everything susceptible to get them into trouble, or to break the group unity (for example, being the one who denounced the Dursleys). What is happening next door doesn't concern them; they have enough with their own troubles. And they don't want to question their own values. Unfortunately, that's not just a fictional matter. The way I see them, the Dursleys are here to tell us that looking normal, or belonging to a norm, can hide an abnormal nature or behaviour. They are part of JKR's game concerning appearances. To their neighbours, the Dursleys are exactly what Professor Quirrell is to the kids at the beginning of PS/SS: a mask, hiding their true nature. There's a hiatus between the image they give and what they are actually. And they apparently don't want to admit they are child abusers (that's what they are, IMO). They don't face their errors. Tom Marvolo Riddle didn't either. You can tell me that I bother you, always talking about metaphors. However, the way I see them, the Dursleys and Voldemort are two pictures of a same problem, called intolerance. On one hand, you have the `domestic aspect', and on the other one, the `social aspect'. But they both root in the same fear of being different, and so rejected. The Dursleys try to fight it giving their neighbours the image of a respectable family. Voldemort tries to fight it dictating his own rules. Though they stand at the extreme opposites, they finally join each others, if not apparently, at least essentially. Just my point of view, of course. Alla : "These books touch something within my soul that not many of the books I read before touched. I am still trying to understand this phenomena, because I read and continue to read A LOT of the books, other than adventures of Mr.Potter. I grew up reading and studying russian clasical literature. I would NEVER consider Rowling to be the same quality writer as I consider .... let's say Tolstoy to be, but at the same time, none of the books by that writer resonates with me as deeply as some of the characters of the "potterverse" do. Wierd? Yes, you bet. I, who NEVER was obsessive fan of any book or musical group, became an obsessive fan of the children's series. Oh, well. There are worse things to obsess about, me thinks." Iris: Ooh, it's good to know I'm not alone Thanks for writing this! Amicalement, Iris From allthingshp at yahoo.com Tue Dec 21 22:38:15 2004 From: allthingshp at yahoo.com (allthingshp) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 22:38:15 -0000 Subject: Three of the Christmas Present Clues... Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120333 It is probably nothing but I wanted to see if anyone else might be able to construe anything important about the remaining three answers to the Christmas tree clues on JK Rowling's website. (The three riddles were Half-Blood-Prince) so I thought there might be something more to Otter-Corned Beef-Bristol. Any ideas? "allthingshp" From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Wed Dec 22 00:06:43 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 00:06:43 -0000 Subject: Death Eaters In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120334 > Kneasy: > If there's that much backstory then I'd bet the name does tie in > somehow - initiation rites maybe? Linked to the Dark Mark? > Let's face it, we're guessing. Neri: I recently did a quick research on death eating and (possibly) related subjects in the potterverse. No conclusions, but plenty of intriguing canon. First, how do you eat Death? Here is a canon example: ***************************** OotP, Ch. 36: But even as he shouted, another jet of green light flew at Dumbledore from Voldemort's wand and the snake struck ? Fawkes swooped down in front of Dumbledore, opened his beak wide and swallowed the jet of green light whole: he burst into flame and fell to the floor, small, wrinkled and flightless. ***************************** Interesting, isn't it? Did the DEs fill the same function for Voldy? Was he protected from death in VW1 because they ate his death (but without the option of rising from the ashes, of course)? And if so, who ate the GH death? In GoF there are three DEs missing from the circle in the graveyard because they are dead. We know who were two of them: Rosier and Wilkes, who were killed by aurors. Who was the third and how did he die? Now, what is the connection between death eating and the Dark Mark? The Dark Mark portrays a skull with a snake coming out of its mouth. And of course, we also have: ***************************** CoS, Ch. 17: Slytherin's gigantic stone face was moving. Horrorstruck, Harry saw his mouth opening, wider and wider, to make a huge black hole. And something was stirring inside the statue's mouth. Something was slithering up from its depths Something huge hit the stone floor of the Chamber. Harry felt it shudder ? he knew what was happening, he could sense it, could almost see the giant serpent uncoiling itself from Slytherin's mouth. ***************************** Scratching you head already? It gets more complicated. There seems to be a connection between Death Eaters, the Dark Mark and fear. Here is what Arthur had to say about this: ***************************** GoF, Ch. 9: "Ron, You-Know-Who and his followers sent the Dark Mark into the air whenever they killed," said Mr. Weasley. "The terror it inspired you have no idea, you're too young. Just picture coming home and finding the Dark Mark hovering over your house, and knowing what you're about to find inside. " Mr. Weasley winced. "Everyone's worst fear the very worst " ***************************** Everyone's worst fear, a boggart maybe? Someone had this theory here recently. I couldn't find anything about boggarts and eating, but generally dark creatures in the potterverse like to eat, and not only Death. Here is what Lupin says about dementors: ***************************** PoA, Ch. 10: If it can, the Dementor will feed on you long enough to reduce you to something like itself ? soul-less and evil. You'll be left with nothing but the worst experiences of your life. ***************************** And two or three paragraphs later: ***************************** PoA, Ch. 10: "They're getting hungry," said Lupin coolly, shutting his briefcase with a snap. "Dumbledore won't let them into the school, so their supply of human prey has dried up I don't think they could resist the large crowd around the Quidditch field. All that excitement emotions running high it was their idea of a feast." ***************************** Dementors not only like to eat human emotions and souls, they also have a connection with fear. Usually they are thought to deprive one of happiness, but here is another note of Lupin about them: ***************************** PoA, Ch 8: "I didn't think of Voldemort," said Harry honestly. "I ? I remembered those dementors." "I see," said Lupin thoughtfully. "Well, well I'm impressed." He smiled slightly at the look of surprise on Harry's face. "That suggests that what you fear most of all is ? fear. Very wise, Harry." ***************************** Why are dementors the embodiment of Fear? Why is it wise of Harry to be afraid of fear more than he is afraid of Voldemort? BTW, this passage comes immediately after we find that Lupin himself is not afraid of saying Voldemort's name. It is not only dementors who like to eat human emotions and fears. Here is what Diary!Riddle has to add in this issue: **************************** CoS, Ch. 17: "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." **************************** And now to something really wild. Has anybody noticed what Snape does with his hands while teaching Occlumency? **************************** OotP, Ch. 24: "Well then, why do I have to learn Occlumency?" Snape eyed Harry, tracing his mouth with one long, thin finger as he did so. "The usual rules do not seem to apply with you, Potter. The curse that failed to kill you seems to have forged some kind of connection between you and the Dark Lord." **************************** Tracing his mouth? Hmm. Could be just a coincidence, of course. But a paragraph later, here it is again: **************************** OotP, Ch. 24: Snape stared at Harry for a few moments, still tracing his mouth with his finger. When he spoke again, it was slowly and deliberately, as though he weighed every word. "It appears that the Dark Lord has been unaware of the connection between you and himself until very recently..." **************************** Again tracing his mouth. Is it only a coincidence that he mentions the connection with "the Dark Lord" in both these paragraphs, while "weighting every word"? Of course, I wouldn't have noticed Snape's hands if it wasn't for this interesting passage, just two paragraphs later: **************************** OotP, Ch. 24: "Do not say the Dark Lord's name!" spat Snape. There was a nasty silence. They glared at each other 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. **************************** So: the Dark Mark, eating Death, eating emotions, saying or not saying Voldemort's name, and fear. How exactly are all these connected? Neri From bob.oliver at cox.net Wed Dec 22 00:36:03 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 00:36:03 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120335 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > - > Well, even those themes of abuse, etc, I would say have a lot to do > with Harry's growing up and noticing that WW is not such happy place > (Duh, Harry ;o)) as he may have thought. > > Of course for miserable child who spent ten years of his life in > the cupboard, WW sounded as great escape. Fifteen year old, who > fought the most evil lord of all times (I definitely agree with > K.G. that Graveyard alone will make anybody grew up and fast), > notices a lot more. > > I remember that one of the first OOP reviews was talking about > symbolic meaning of "dissilusionment" charm - as Harry opening his > eyes and seeing a lot of unpleasant things going on around him. I > happen to agree with such POV. Okay, sure. I really don't understand what you're trying to say here, Alla. I'm saying that one of the objections people had to OOTP was the narrative turn. You are saying the narrative turn is part of growing up. Fine. I agree, but that has nothing to do with whether people have a problem with the way the story themes are presented and play out and what the implications are. Are you saying that it is illegitimate to have a problem with these themes (which I don't think because it would be very inconsistent with a lot of your posts)? Or do you have some other point, because if so it utterly escapes me. Lupinlore From moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 22 00:54:25 2004 From: moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com (K G) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 16:54:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Usual cast of suspects (a few more added) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041222005425.43180.qmail@web53510.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120336 lilypo2007 wrote: First, I'd like to notice that when JKR said about new deaths in HBP, she didn't say it was a very known character. And of course there'll be deaths. There is a war going on. Lilyp In several of the interviews that I have read today, JKR was supposedly quoted as saying that one of the main characters would die in this book. She would not give clues to which one, only that it was not Harry or LV. moonmyyst --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Send holiday email and support a worthy cause. Do good. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 22 01:06:25 2004 From: moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com (K G) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 17:06:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Three of the Christmas Present Clues... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041222010625.37231.qmail@web53509.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120337 allthingshp wrote: It is probably nothing but I wanted to see if anyone else might be able to construe anything important about the remaining three answers to the Christmas tree clues on JK Rowling's website. (The three riddles were Half-Blood-Prince) so I thought there might be something more to Otter-Corned Beef-Bristol. Any ideas? "allthingshp" Mugglenet is reporting that if you add the letters and the candles on the tree, you come up with the date of the book release. moonmyyst --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 22 01:42:15 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 01:42:15 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120338 Kneasy wrote: > There are an awful lot of theories back there - some wondrous, some fantastic, some farcical. Enjoy them. Relish them. Even hate them. But treat them for what they are - theories. Attempts to explain the whys and wherefores of the story, attempts to explain what the hell is > going on. In two books time it'll all stop, there'll be definitive > canon that can't be countered, all the important stuff will be > explained (it'd better be!) and all that'll be left will be minor nit- > picking or FF. > > Siriusly Snapey Susan replied: > And with this I totally agree. The early theories & FPs set the > stage, set the vernacular of this place. I need to go back and > relish more of them than I have. Carol responds: While I absolutely agree that all posters should read the fantastic Posts and Recommended Posts and that knee-jerk, emotion-based responses to the books and characters are out of place here, I certainly hope that the discussion won't end when Book 7 is published. While I do expect that all the major plot threads and most of the minor ones will be resolved (not necessarily to my satisfaction--that would be too much to expect), I certainly don't think that "all the important stuff" will have been resolved. Any significant literary work--and I think the HP books fit the category, even if they are technically children's literature--is still subject to interpretation decades or even centuries after publication. We'll have "definitive canon" for the fates of the characters, finishing off the SHIPs or relegating them to fanfic; we'll know who lives and who dies; who teaches at Hogwarts and who works for the MoM; who's loyal to the end and who's a traitor. But that won't, or shouldn't, end discussion of what shapes and motivates the characters, or the exploration of thematic elements or even the significance of setting or symbolism. Look at the people who still earn a living as critics of Shakespeare or Chaucer or Dickens or Melville. Or Tolkien and fantasy in general. You'd be surprised what you can get a degree in these days. Long live Rowling criticism, in the sense of literary analysis of the HP books, and don't let it die along with ESE!Lupin and ESGAA! (Ever So Good and Alive) Quirrell when we've all turned the last page of Book 7. Carol, who bought herself QTA and FBWFT for Christmas even though she considers them only secondarily canonical From imamommy at sbcglobal.net Wed Dec 22 02:14:39 2004 From: imamommy at sbcglobal.net (imamommy at sbcglobal.net) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 02:14:39 -0000 Subject: Aunt Petunia (was Re: Theoretical boundaries) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120339 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "iris_ft" wrote: > Iris : >Snip > In PS/SS, Aunt Petunia calls her sister a freak and says Harry is > abnormal (chapter 4). They are different from her. However, she > behaves herself as a freak and as an abnormal person towards her > nephew (she's ridiculous, I agree, but at the same time rather > monstrous as a woman, IMO). Snip > Iris I'm sorry to snip such a beautiful post, but this is the only part that relates to the point of my post. Let me set this up: In my chosen religion, people tend to either be very active in church, and follow all (or most) of the tenants of the doctrine, or else they shy away from the church nearly completely (there is a gray area in the middle, of course, but bear with me.) Sometimes, if a person feels hurt or offended by someone in the church, they will shun the church and even speak out against it in anger and hatred. Aunt Petunia's behavior reminds me a lot of people in that last category, and so I started thinking: could she be a witch who *refused* to learn magic? Now, JKR is quoted as saying: "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." (from the World Book Day Chat) According to this, Petunia is a muggle, but is it possible that she *chose* to be a muggle? Could she have been born into a part- wizarding family. and decided not to go to Hogwarts? What is the "more" to her? Uncle Vernon's ignorance, I think, is largely supplicated by his wife's opinions. I often find that people are intolerant to the very idea of my religious faith because of some rumor they have heard, that is either completely false, grossly overexaggerated, or taken completely out of context. Is it possible that Petunia got in so far, saw something that offended her, and decided to get out? Or wanted to live in the (muggle) world and not change her whole lifestyle? I would find her character immensely interesting if this turned out to be the case. imamommy Who begs you to forgive her religious bias; it's a big part of who she is. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 22 02:24:25 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 02:24:25 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120340 Lupinlore: Okay, sure. I really don't understand what you're trying to say here, Alla. I'm saying that one of the objections people had to OOTP was the narrative turn. You are saying the narrative turn is part of growing up. Fine. I agree, but that has nothing to do with whether people have a problem with the way the story themes are presented and play out and what the implications are. Are you saying that it is illegitimate to have a problem with these themes (which I don't think because it would be very inconsistent with a lot of your posts)? Or do you have some other point, because if so it utterly escapes me. Alla: Oh, no, no, no. Of course I am not saying that it is illegitimate to have a problem with these themes. I think I am experiencing language problem again. I think I misunderstood what you meant by "narrative turn". Please bear with me and correct me if I misunderstood you. I thought that you were saying that your problem with OOP was that particular themes were presented inconsistently and particular characters were OOC as comparing to the previous books. So far so good, right? If you meant different thing, please tell me, because then my argument fails. I was explaining why I thought exactly the opposite. I thought those themes were presented quite consistently througout the series and the characters were developing quite consistently througout the series. I was also saying that seeming inconsistencies (in my opinion only) could be explained by the fact that Harry is growing up and he sees more than he saw previously. Let's go back to the themes. First of all abuse and these dreaded Dursleys. I am not really sure why people are saying that Rowling suddenly introduced abuse as theme in OOP, while in my opinion the abuse was presented VERY consistently throught the books. I mean, sure, Dursleys looked much more caricature like in the earlier books, BUT Harry's suffering was VERY real, starting from him spending ten years in the cupboard. in PS/SS Petunia tries to hit him with the frying pan, in CoS he is locked up with the bars on his windows and he is afraid that he will die from hunger, etc., etc. Am I being confusing again? I disagree that abuse theme SUDDENLY appeared in OOP. I think it was always there, just looked a bit more fairytale like. Let's talk about characters being OOC, in particularly Dumbledore, since you raised this argument, right? Correct me if I am wrong, but I think you said that Dumbledore SUDDENLY appeared to be manipulative in OOP. I think Dumbledore can ALWAYS be read a manipulative. I mean we can argue about his motivations, etc, but the possibility of Manipulator!Dumbledore in my opinion was always there. After all, he does not suddenly tells Harry to go to Dursleys in OOP, right? He leaves him there in the first book, despite McGonagall objection and says some very strange things while doing so. I am sorry if I am not clear againh. I suppose my only point was that in my opinion only themes in OOP were consistent througout the books. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 22 02:42:24 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 02:42:24 -0000 Subject: One last try (re: Parenting Harry (was: Re: I don't like him much)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120341 > Renee again: What I was trying to say was, that discussing Snape as a character and discussing him als a plot device with a certain function in the story are two different things and can lead to very different assessments. If one poster talks about Snape's flaws as a person and criticises him for his behaviour and another poster is trying to assess his function in the narrative and values the role he's been assigned to play, they'll end up misunderstanding each other. When I >read your exchange with Eloise, I thought I saw that happening. Alla: Thanks, Renee. Could you still help me out a little bit? Sure, me wanting to scream at Snape comes from looking at the character "as a person " or looking at the character within the story. Of course I don't want him out of the narrative, when I look at him outside the story, I consider him to be one of the JKR's finest creations. BUT and here is my misunderstanding probably comes from. Even when I look at the character outside the story, I cannot employ neutral attitude towards him. Am I supposed to,when I assess his function within the text? Going back to very beginning, I thought that besides arguing that Snape is an Enforcer of the rules in the story, Eloise was arguing that the character should be praised for how well he performs this function. (Sorry, Eloise I probably misunderstood you again) and that is what I was absolutely disagreeing with. From macfotuk at yahoo.com Wed Dec 22 02:51:39 2004 From: macfotuk at yahoo.com (macfotuk at yahoo.com) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 02:51:39 -0000 Subject: Doesn't she know? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120342 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Inge" wrote: > > This may have been brought up before. If so, sorry for repeating > stuff. > The headline of this post was written with a smile (just so that you > know....) ! > > I found this map of Hogwarts / Hogsmeade that Rowling made for the > POA movie - and much to my surprise I had to wonder: "How wrong she > is - doesn't she know better?" Mac interjects: Having bought the 2-DVD edition as a late November birthday present for my neice I just HAD to 'look it over' before she got it, and I discovered said map on the 2nd disc. Unfortunately I've found your link broken (maybe it's just me) so can't re-check my facts. However, and anyway, since JKR drew the picture and the films have made heavy reference to this map (so they said in the documentary bits), I'm happy to consider it 'canon' (as opposed to Steve's best guess version). > I know - I know.... it's her story etc. etc. etc. Of course she knows > best. > But! (and here's the link > http://users.atw.hu/mkepek/galleries/filmek/azkaban/extra/038_by_jkr. j > pg (hope it works?) - why does she place the Whomping Willow on the > route from the castle to Hagrids hut? Is that really where the tree > is? If so - why didn't anyone warn the 1st years to be aware of the > dangerous tree? And why is it that Harry and friends never mention it > prior to hitting it with the Ford Anglia? > Curious! Very curious! Mac again: Not really. JKR like Agatha Christie before her never gives us clues until she just isn't able NOT to. Only in book 7 will you really get a proper set of information that will allow answers to key questions such as what is Snape REALLY up to? what REALLY happened at Godric's Hollow and 'whodunnit' (and why). Again and again she hasn't told us things that are key to the overall (books 1- 7) plot, such as what Lily and James did for a living, is Petunia a witch, a muggle or what? and the reasons are that she has a mystery to keep mysteriosu -the reason we're still reading and madly speculating. > > I compared Rowlings map to the one by Steve (Lexicon) and found > Steve's version much more to my own liking. Here the Willow is placed > so that you don't have to pass it to get from the castle to Hagrid's - > but also closer to Hogsmeade than on Rowling's map - which I find > more beliveable because of the tree's use as a tunnel for Lupin - > back in the old days of course. > > On Rowling's map the Lake is placed 'behind' the castle. Meaning that > Hogsmeade is to the north of the castle while the Lake is south of > the castle. Now that seems odd - because 1st years go by boat from > Hogsmeade - crossing the Lake and beneath the castle. Mac: No!!!!!!!!! They go from Hogsmeade STATION. Like many railway stations in Britain this needn't be anywhere near the village itself and, in fact (i.e. on JKR's map) the station is south of the lake, Hogwart's School (of W&W)/castle and Hogsmeade village (in that order, going north). > Rowling putting the Lake the way she did in the map the 1st years > would have to go all the way around the castle to get to the Lake - > only to sail back again..... that doesn't make much sense - does it? Mac: No. you missed the station's location. > > Once again - comparing to Steve's version. He placed the Lake BETWEEN > Hogsmeade and the castle which is more convincing when considered 1st > years by boat. > > So my question once again (with yet another smile) - doesn't she know? > Mac; yes, in fact (of course, as I know you know), she does. > Inge From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 22 03:21:15 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 03:21:15 -0000 Subject: First Riddle on JKR's website (Website Spoiler See it yourself First ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120343 Jen wrote: > *Then* I wondered about Lupin. Maybe there was more to his becoming > a werewolf than we know. He said he was foolish and got bitten, but > given his self-deprecating way, did it only appear to happen that > way and he's actually ensnared by a spell that will only end upon > someone's death? > Any other thoughts? > > > > > Alla: > > Heee! I also thought about Remus. Maybe he can assume his royal > duties only after the person who bite him will die and accordingly > he will be free. :o) Maybe this person was his father. > > I wish... I think I read too many fanfiction stories. :o) Carol responds: I don't think we're getting a clue here, other than that the HBP is the son (and heir) of a king, who must die before he (the HBP) can enter into the "power and glory" of kingship. Presumably, there are still ruling kings in the WW (unless the HBP is Godric Gryffindor and his "power and glory" is posthumous). IMO, JKR simply chose questions that most readers would know the answers to, with three of them in the form of riddles as a clue that they belonged together. IOW, she deliberately made both the games (figuring out what to click on) and the riddles unusually easy this time around as a Christmas present to her fans (along with the reward at the end). Carol, who nevertheless struggled a bit more with this one than she should have under the circumstances (maybe I should read more mysteries to get in the habit of solving riddles and deciphering clues?) From jennifer_maccherone at yahoo.com Wed Dec 22 00:45:28 2004 From: jennifer_maccherone at yahoo.com (nifferhpfan) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 00:45:28 -0000 Subject: Death Eaters In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120344 Neri, Excellent compilation. So, Voldemort feeds on fear (as with Ginny), yet Voldemort is obviously afraid of death himself, trying his best to "flee death" and be immortal. The wizard who Voldemort is most afraid of is Dumbledore who is the epitome of Gryffindor courage. So, perhaps, in order to vanquish Voldemort, not only does Harry need love, but courage, and perhaps especially the courage to face death. Maybe this courage is the "power the Dark Lord knows not." Maybe Harry lived at one because he didn't know enough to be afraid? Niffer From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 22 03:34:36 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 03:34:36 -0000 Subject: Death Eaters In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120345 Neri: skipping excellent canon support > So: the Dark Mark, eating Death, eating emotions, saying or not saying Voldemort's name, and fear. How exactly are all these connected? Alla: Great research, Neri. Just a brief comment. I was speculating in one of my earlier posts, which I cannot find now that maybe Snape managed to extract some kind of essense of Death and make a potion out of it . Maybe this essense was the fear of the dying person before he/she gets hit with AK. Maybe this potion brought Voldie some kind of immortality (more like cursed life, of course). But I cannot even speculate how all of it can be connected with Dark Mark. From mcdee1980 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 22 03:40:06 2004 From: mcdee1980 at yahoo.com (mcdee1980) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 03:40:06 -0000 Subject: Potion Task Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120346 Hey y'all, I haven't posted in a very very long while, but something occurred to me tonight as I was reading an editorial. I'm not sure if this was posted early on, but forgive me if it was: in Snape's puzzle in the very first book there are seven bottles, seven bottles and seven books. There are three bottles of poison, two of wine, one that takes the drinker forward and one that moves the drinker back. Having now read five of seven books perhaps we can align the bottles with the books. I'm not sure if the books will follow the riddle answer, but it provides two seperate solutions. The proper answer for the riddle works like this: 1=Poison 2=Wine 3=either P or Forward 4=either P or Forward (JKR is not clear as to which is which, however, we know that which ever bottle was smaller is the F bottle) 5=P 6=W and 7=Back. If you sit down with the riddle and the book, you can figure this out for yourself. How does this follow the books? 1=Poison SS, Voldemort's first attempt at coming back alive leaves p,p,poor Professor Q dead and brings darkness into Harry's newfound world. 2=Wine CS Harry again defeats LV and saves Ginny from certain doom 3= POA I'm going to go with Forward on this one, Book three moves the series forward, but has no big death, so it can't be a poison book (feel free to argue that point) 4=Poison GOF Cedric dies, LV comes back for real . . . lots of bad news at the end of this book 5=OOP Poison Sirius dies 6=HBP Wine, well it looks like a happy ending? 7=? Backwards, perhaps 7 will take us back and tell us how the whole thing started! Now lets look at it from another perspective. The books don't fit the potion order, but rather the spirit: 1 SS = Wine, Harry triumphs over LV 2 CS = Wine, See above 3 POA = Backwards, gives us the most insight we've gotten so far about the past, changes the past, brings PP "back from the dead", Time travel 4 GOF = Poison, same as first reason 5 OOP = Poison, same as first reason 6/7 HBP/? One is P the other is forward. We've been told to expect more character deaths . . . I'm not sure on this one! Sorry for the EXTREMELY long musings, its past my bedtime! Lady McBeth, who imagines she's long since been forgotten From macfotuk at yahoo.com Wed Dec 22 03:41:52 2004 From: macfotuk at yahoo.com (macfotuk at yahoo.com) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 03:41:52 -0000 Subject: (canon-based) Petunia/DD and HBP speculations - longish (SPOILER?) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120347 Well, it's official. Thanks to posters I managed to get JKR's Xmas message saying that book 6 is due out on 01.00 BST July 16, 2005 (have already ordered from Amazon). Confirms suspicions. And too bad we couldn't wait to rip open the paper on that particular Xmas present. I was warned by an eminent poster not to write a piece with many potential sub-threads and that's good advice, but have limited time so here goes in ignoring him (sorry!): I still haven't found a satisfactory explanation for the (apparent) flurry of owls between Dumbledore and Petunia. Things exploded in real life around the time JKR dropped the bombshell on her website that such a correspondence had taken place and so, I have to admit, I was unable to keep a proper watching brief on speculations here (scuse any repetitiousness of ideas/thinking). Even so, my take on it was that correspondence related to one or all of the following: [1] When 15 month old HP needed a home (post GH explosions) there quite likely would have needed to be an extensive consultative set of owls between DD and Petunia before DD felt confident about placing Harry at Privet Drive. book 1 contains many swooping owls in the vicinity of Privet Drive on the day after GH. [2] There is a big debate about Petunia having been eligible in her own right to attend Hogwart's and maybe the prior (i.e. not 'my last') correspondence relates to this and Petunia's rejection of WW. [3] Prior to GH it seems likely that LV and the DE's systematically slaughtered HP's relatives (more because they were JP and LP's relatives than HP's and to threaten Lily and James with 'what we are capable of') and this included Petunia's parents and, possibly, grandparents/other relatives (if any). Maybe DD's prior correspondence with Petunia relates to this era/set of events - apologies, commiserations, warnings etc. Would be interested to hear alternative views and, of course, JKR's take on things (she said she'd be watching - though I doubt here because (a) there are so many postings to read - overwhelming! and (b)HPFGU hasn't yet figured as a recommended site on her own website). As for predictions: Have no idea who HBP is, but an opening chapter 13 years in the writing HAS to be an account of events at GH. Maybe now that Sirius is dead ('disposed of')it can be revealed what exactly he was up to by being there so quickly afterwards (or earlier? - cue sinister music). If Sirius had a dark role at GH and HP gets to appreciate this (dream, flashback or account from a bystander) then he can move on into the action of book 6 without Sirius' death being a continuing issue (he was bad, get on with it Harry)? which brings us to Spinner's end (ch2 title). Spinner's suggest web or trap or plot/deceit, though might just be a placename. Whose? The Lovegood's I'd suggest. (could be the Knotts' residence though). I can imagine that Lovegood Sr would be happy to invite Harry for the summer and that Harry's regard for Luna (the near last chapter of Ootp, in which we see her gathering lost belongings was SO poignant) as a fellow 'odd bod' would make him happy to go. Other predictions? none yet. It'd help to know who the HBP might be and, of course, how nasty LV is going to get in this book (I LOVED the graveyard scene which is why I found much of OotP so disappointing since LV's has SUCH a low profile therein). I hope VERY (nasty), but also hope he'll leave the central characters (Ron, Hermione, Snape) unhurt (and yes, I'd include DD too (and Hagrid for that matter), but maybe he (DD) HAS to die in a cliffhanger at the end of book 6 so that HArry really *iS* 'on his own'?). There are a hundred issues discussed already that it seems necessary for book 6 to cover (e.g. Neville's new wand and his back story/development generally, what was the brain's affect on Ron, and has Hermione been changed too?, H/R ship development, F&G joke shop, Quidditch with Ron and Ginny as team members and Harry captain, Grawp (don't like him), Fudge's successor, Mrs Malfoy, Percy's future, Peter Petigrew's, The dementors', Harry's learning to apparate, OWLs results and NEWT choices, Lily and James fill-in, just who was Sirius anyway and *is* Lupin, Petunia back- story/development/motivation, DE's in (or sprung from) Azkhaban. Cannot wait. Thinking of shading out my work diary as holiday for w/c 16th July 2005 (I need the whole week since I'm such a slow reader). But then also trying to remember that yes, I have a real life too. Happy Xmas to all (who want one) Mac From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 22 03:53:23 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 03:53:23 -0000 Subject: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 34, "The Department of Mysteries" In-Reply-To: <155.46661932.2ef8cbbc@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120348 Question: > > 1) Thestrals obviously understand human language since they were able to understand Harry's instructions. Why is that? Can most magical animal/beasts/beings understand the human language? > Lisa the Lurker responded: > A1). Might I suggest some magical creatures can understand Wizard humans based on their magic. Carol adds: A good point (not "poing"--I always mistype this particular word). There's no single human language, not even the pseudo-Latin of the spells. Evidently Thestrals are like the more intelligent enchanted objects (e.g., wands or Firebolts in) that they understand the *desires* of Wizards regardless of the language the Wizard speaks. The same appears to apply to cats, at least those that are half-Kneazel like Crookshanks (and Mrs. Norris and Mr. Tibbs?) and owls, at least the magical variety. (If there are magical rats and common street rats, then presumably owls also come in magical and nonmagical varieties. An Animagus, OTOH, would understand animal language, as Peter Pettigrew did in his search for Voldemort, but probably not the languages of other Wizards. I don't think that PP understood Albanian any more than Ron or Hagrid understands French.) Carol, who hopes that the MoM keeps written records of the contents of the Prophecies because otherwise the smashed prophecy globes are a sad and irreparable loss From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 22 04:26:16 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 04:26:16 -0000 Subject: Death Eaters In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120349 severelysigune earlier: headhunters - er- headhunt. They kill in order to absorb their rivals' power into themselves. the Celts reasoned similarly, even though, as far as I know, they didn't literally eat the brains - they > > > kept the skulls, or in Ireland (at least in the story of Cormac > > > McArt) they prepared the brains and kept them stored somehow. > Sigune again: > I really want to find out more about why the Death Eaters are > called Death Eaters, apart from the name sounding morbid. The death > part certainly could have some relevance to Voldie's quest for > immortality; but even if I have found myself a FEATHERBOA sometime > ago, somehow I doubt that JKR is going to show us, say, Lucius Malfoy eating someone's brain. In any case I will be disappointed if we never hear anything more about the name. Carol responds: I agree that the Death Eaters are probably connected with the Celtic practice of retaining their enemies' heads to have power over them. (There's also the Dark Mark emblem, but that skull seems to be Salazar Slytherin's given the snake for a tongue.) At any rate, the WW seems to have connections with Druidism as reflected for example in the wandwood symbolism (yew and holly especially)--and JKR has stated that Hogwarts is built on a old Celtic ruin. (I've speculated elsewhere that the Veil was connected with Druid ritual sacrifices.) I also think you're right that Death Eater doesn't imply eating the brains (or any other part) of their dead enemies. At least I hope not! How horrible if the rite of passage includes cannibalism. (Shiver!) I think more likely they're trying to eat Death itself in some ritural form, possibly in the hope of sharing in their master's immortality? Maybe they've tasted poison--Snape's bottled Death--or a bit of snake venom to prove their devotion to Voldemort? Clearly it *hasn't* made them immortal--at least three DES (Wilkes, Rosier, and one other) are "dead in [Voldemort's] service}. But I would venture the few knuts in my possession (actually, I don't have even one) that they've "eaten Death" in some ritual form and that it ties in somehow with Druidism. Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 22 04:47:39 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 04:47:39 -0000 Subject: First Riddle on JKR's website (Website Spoiler See it yourself First ) In-Reply-To: <200412210918387.SM01040@devbox> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120350 moonmyyst wrote: > > Would Aragog be considered a king? What about the giants? Centaurs? How are the goblins lead? I personally do not think that the HBP is a creature. (maybe a half creature?) Vivamus replied: > They are all possibilities; we just don't have any information about them. The Giant leader was called something else, not a king. Carol adds: The leader of the giants was called the Gurg (Chief). But "half-blood" is used in the books specifically with regard to Wizards with one Muggle (or Muggleborn) parent (or two Muggle grandparents). The term used for half-human Wizards, rude though it sounds, is "half-breed." As the only half-bloods who've been identified so far (IIRC) are Harry, Tom Riddle, and Seamus Finnegan, the first two have been ruled out by JKR herself and the last is unlikely in the extreme, I'm voting for a newcomer, probably Felix Felicis. I'm also betting that he's the lionlike man of an earlier website revelation and (90 % certainty this time) that he's the new DADA instructor. Carol, who will be extremely disappointed if the HBP is part giant or part goblin. (Bad enough that we have to put up with Grawp.) From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 22 05:17:31 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 05:17:31 -0000 Subject: Usual cast of suspects In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120351 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Karen" wrote: > > I think that the main character who will die in this book will be > Dumbledore. He has been doing his best to keep Harry safe and > supporting him, but there has to come a point where Harry faces > Voldemort totally on his own. I think that HBP will end with > Dumbledore telling Harry almost everything and then towards the end > he'll die. That leaves the whole last book for Harry to face > Voldemort on his own. Then he'll figure out everything else we need > to know and what happens next is a totally different thing to > discuss. Is there any clues in the books to back up my theory? I > really don't have any to site this, it is just my opinion. > > > Karen Evans Carol responds: Just a note here. We don't actually have a new JKR quotation in the article about the HBP publication date. It's probably picking up on the recent rumor that "a" character will die in Book 6. We've known for quite some time that "more deaths" are coming, and it's most unlikely that all but one will occur in Book 7. I'd say we'd better prepare for several deaths, not necessarily as significant as Dumbledore, who IMO will die in Book 7. Probably more than one Weasley and maybe a Hogwarts student. We might even lose Lupin. It will, I predict, be more than one person, and both Molly's boggart and the clock in the Weasleys' hallway with a hand that can point to "mortal peril" suggest that one or more Weasleys are down for the count. Not the twins, please, obnoxious as they sometimes are. And not Percy, who needs his shot at penance and redemption. I predict Charlie Weasley, Luna, and Lupin. And that's only Book 6. Carol, noting that it won't be Snape because JKR has promised a significant moment for him in Book 7 From bob.oliver at cox.net Wed Dec 22 07:56:08 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 07:56:08 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120352 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > > Lupinlore: > > Alla: > > Oh, no, no, no. Of course I am not saying that it is illegitimate to > have a problem with these themes. > > I think I am experiencing language problem again. I think I > misunderstood what you meant by "narrative turn". Please bear with > me and correct me if I misunderstood you. > > > I thought that you were saying that your problem with OOP was that > particular themes were presented inconsistently and particular > characters were OOC as comparing to the previous books. > > So far so good, right? If you meant different thing, please tell me, > because then my argument fails. > > > I was explaining why I thought exactly the opposite. I thought those > themes were presented quite consistently througout the series and > the characters were developing quite consistently througout the > series. > > I was also saying that seeming inconsistencies (in my opinion only) > could be explained by the fact that Harry is growing up and he sees > more than he saw previously. > > Let's go back to the themes. First of all abuse and these dreaded > Dursleys. I am not really sure why people are saying that Rowling > suddenly introduced abuse as theme in OOP, while in my opinion the > abuse was presented VERY consistently throught the books. > > I mean, sure, Dursleys looked much more caricature like in the > earlier books, BUT Harry's suffering was VERY real, starting from > him spending ten years in the cupboard. in PS/SS Petunia tries to > hit him with the frying pan, in CoS he is locked up with the bars on > his windows and he is afraid that he will die from hunger, etc., etc. > > Am I being confusing again? I disagree that abuse theme SUDDENLY > appeared in OOP. I think it was always there, just looked a bit > more fairytale like. > > Let's talk about characters being OOC, in particularly Dumbledore, > since you raised this argument, right? > > Correct me if I am wrong, but I think you said that Dumbledore > SUDDENLY appeared to be manipulative in OOP. I think Dumbledore can > ALWAYS be read a manipulative. I mean we can argue about his > motivations, etc, but the possibility of Manipulator!Dumbledore in > my opinion was always there. > > After all, he does not suddenly tells Harry to go to Dursleys in > OOP, right? He leaves him there in the first book, despite > McGonagall objection and says some very strange things while doing > so. > > > I am sorry if I am not clear againh. I suppose my only point was > that in my opinion only themes in OOP were consistent througout the > books. Okay. I don't think you are having language problems, Alla. Your English, as usual, is excellent. I think the point we are working toward is rather subtle. I agree that, taken as a whole, one can see the characters' as consistent in terms of their ACTIONS. What has shifted, however, is the TONE of the narrative. And therein lie many of the problems. As has been pointed out, the early stages of the HP saga were told in the form of a modern fairy tale (which is different than a medieval fairy tale, I acknowledge). Now, modern fairy tales function by certain rules, and therefore we respond to them emotionally on a certain level. One of the rules is that terrible things happen, but nobody *really* gets hurt and the villains get their just rewards anyway. So we don't get outraged that the father in Hansel and Gretel tries to abandon his kids in the woods, for instance, because the story takes place in a fairy tale. Another way of saying that is that the modern fairy tale is a particular genre that has a particular tone and that therefore raises a particular response. Now, OOTP is *not* a modern fairy tale. It is something rather like a dark melodrama with magical elements. That is a totally different genre. We respond very, very differently to melodrama than we do to modern fairy tales. Things that do not necessarily raise our ire in fairy tales *do* in melodrama. And it is that shift of TONE, of GENRE, that raises the problem. Imagine, if you will, a sequel to Hansel and Gretel that has Hansel suffering emotional shock from being abandoned by his father in the woods, and draws him as a believable adolescent rather than a childish caracature. That would be similar to what happened in OOTP. (Yes, I know that the comparison isn't EXACT, but I think it serves to make the point). The actions would still be the same, and still consistent, but what was not emotionally problematic in the fairy tale *is* in the sequel. I think what I and others are getting at when we talk about inconsistency is *MAINLY* tone -- although I do still think there are issues with characterization, that isn't what I'm talking about here. Because the books are linked together, when the tone shifts, our view of the events in the earlier books is suddenly wrenched into a different mode. What was not problematic before, because it was a fairy tale, IS now. Now, the question is, what do we make of this change in tone. It is, as a narrative technique, good writing or not? And that is very subjective. Some find it original and fresh. Others, a great many, aren't so sure. By changing genre, JKR in effect changes the rules about what can and cannot be expected. Is that interesting, or is it a form of narrative cheating? One of my friends upon reading OOTP was highly insulted, as she saw it as an exercise in JKR taunting her readers, in effect saying "AHA! Gotcha! You *thought* you knew what was going on but I fooled you!" I wouldn't go that far, but I'm not prepared to say I think the sudden change in tone was a particularly good idea. One can make all sorts of intellectual arguments as to why it's appropriate, given the developing age of the characters, etc., but as a *narrative* technique, i.e. as a method used to tell a story, it left a lot of people with a sour taste in their mouths, and set the stage for the enormous emotional backlash we've seen the last couple of years. Another way of putting it is, did JKR intend to create the kind of emotional backlash she did with OOTP? I rather doubt it. I'm sure she intended to be provocative and surprising. I'm not at all sure she intended to generate the kind of distaste and anger she has in a lot of quarters. Now, I think this is due to the fact, as I've said before, that she doesn't realize what the implications of the story seem like to somebody who's coming at it fresh without her years of pondering it. For instance, I really rather doubt she intended for people to react so negatively to Dumbledore. But that is because she has dwelled with this story so long she in effect didn't realize what she was saying when she had him say and do a lot of the stuff he did in OOTP. Oh, I think she meant to humanize him and show his flaws. I *don't* think she meant him to come off as stupidly as he does, or to raise all the moral issues OOTP raises -- such as all the Snape/Dursley abuse stuff. Wow, long answer. But I'm still just grazing the surface of this, which is enormously complicated and can be rather subtle. But I *think* I've touched the main point. Let me know if I have not. Lupinlore From bob.oliver at cox.net Wed Dec 22 08:30:32 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 08:30:32 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120353 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > > Carol responds: > While I absolutely agree that all posters should read the fantastic > Posts and Recommended Posts and that knee-jerk, emotion-based > responses to the books and characters are out of place here, I > certainly hope that the discussion won't end when Book 7 is published. Hmmm. Well, that depends, now doesn't it? What is the purpose of fiction after all? I agree that it can be an intellectual puzzle. But is that the heart of fiction? Speculating about narrative technique and the uses of plot and character and all that can be interesting, but is that the main way one should approach a story? In that fiction tells us something about the human condition, an emotional response is, perhaps, the most appropriate response. Human beings are deeply emotional creatures, and it is on the level of emotion that most people interact with, and respond to, a story. Therefore, to be genuine about your reaction, you must be emotional. I certainly disagree that emotional responses to plot and character are out of place here. This is not an academic discussion of the mechanics of JKR's writing, nor is it an exercise in applying one literary theory or another, or in arguing which literary theory is most appropriate for analysis of canon, or in constructing formal arguments according to any particular rules of evidence or procedure. It is a forum for discussing how this piece of fiction affects our human lives. Now, if you happen to find all those things (theory and mechanics and formal rules of evidence) to be powerful and meaningful, then employ them by all means. However many of us aren't particularly impressed with such approaches, as we find interacting with this story to be primarily a human response to human characters - - i.e. an emotional and even, to use an admittedly vague and sometimes maligned word -- a spiritual experience. Our responses will be emotion based, and we aren't very interested in "criticism" as such. If you are, more power to you! But don't make the mistake of thinking that is the only appropriate way of approaching HP, in this forum or anywhere else, or that the tools and methods and language of the literary critic will impress everyone, or make any dent in the way we approach the sotry. So we *will* continue to excoriate the Dursleys, and to argue about why Dumbledore allows Snape to be abusive, and to decry any pernicious/morally outrageous themes we see. You are more than welcome to participate in the threads or sail right past them, just as we will likely sail past threads trying to view the Dursleys as a plot element, or arguing about Snape's place in the narrative arc, or relating the moral/ethical structure of Hogwarts to the practices of the Edwardian public school. Lupinlore From R.Vink2 at chello.nl Wed Dec 22 10:19:40 2004 From: R.Vink2 at chello.nl (Renee) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 10:19:40 -0000 Subject: One last try (re: Parenting Harry ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120354 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > > > Alla: > > Could you still help me out a little bit? > > Sure, me wanting to scream at Snape comes from looking at the > character "as a person " or looking at the character within the > story. > > Of course I don't want him out of the narrative, when I look at him > outside the story, I consider him to be one of the JKR's finest > creations. > > BUT and here is my misunderstanding probably comes from. Even when I > look at the character outside the story, I cannot employ neutral > attitude towards him. > > Am I supposed to,when I assess his function within the text? Renee: Basically, yes. When discussing the technical side of storytelling - how the effects are brought about, how the elements of the story are put together, etc., I find that having strong opinions about the characters tends to obscure my views of how they function in the story. Snape the character is allowed to push my buttons, but if I want to talk about Snape the plot device, Snape the metaphor, Snape the archetype, or whatever, I try to take a step back and be as objective as possible. Actually, when approached at this level, Snape isn't a character anymore but an object of study. Alla: > Going back to very beginning, I thought that besides arguing that > Snape is an Enforcer of the rules in the story, Eloise was arguing > that the character should be praised for how well he performs this > function. (Sorry, Eloise I probably misunderstood you again) and > that is what I was absolutely disagreeing with. Renee: I didn't read it as such, but rather as a comment on how well Snape as a plot device *serves* this function, regardless of the merits of his performance - or lack thereof. But it could be I'm the one who didn't get it. From R.Vink2 at chello.nl Wed Dec 22 10:26:21 2004 From: R.Vink2 at chello.nl (Renee) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 10:26:21 -0000 Subject: First Riddle on JKR's website (Website Spoiler See it yourself First ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120355 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > > As the only half-bloods who've been identified so far (IIRC) are > Harry, Tom Riddle, and Seamus Finnegan, the first two have been ruled > out by JKR herself and the last is unlikely in the extreme, I'm voting > for a newcomer, probably Felix Felicis. I'm also betting that he's the > lionlike man of an earlier website revelation and (90 % certainty this > time) that he's the new DADA instructor. > Renee (succumbing to the temptation to speculate): Of late, I've been wondering if Felix Felicis is a character at all. Somehow, it doesn't sound like a personal name to me. Maybe it's a charm or a spell? As for the king who is going to be succeeded by the half-blood prince, couldn't it be a metaphorical king - a leader (say, DD)? Renee From iris_ft at yahoo.fr Wed Dec 22 10:31:40 2004 From: iris_ft at yahoo.fr (iris_ft) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 10:31:40 -0000 Subject: Aunt Petunia (was Re: Theoretical boundaries) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120356 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, imamommy at s... wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "iris_ft" wrote: > > > Iris : > >Snip > > > > In PS/SS, Aunt Petunia calls her sister a freak and says Harry is > > abnormal (chapter 4). They are different from her. However, she > > behaves herself as a freak and as an abnormal person towards her > > nephew (she's ridiculous, I agree, but at the same time rather > > monstrous as a woman, IMO). > > Snip > > Iris > > I'm sorry to snip such a beautiful post, but this is the only part > that relates to the point of my post. > > Let me set this up: In my chosen religion, people tend to either be > very active in church, and follow all (or most) of the tenants of the > doctrine, or else they shy away from the church nearly completely > (there is a gray area in the middle, of course, but bear with me.) > Sometimes, if a person feels hurt or offended by someone in the > church, they will shun the church and even speak out against it in > anger and hatred. > > Aunt Petunia's behavior reminds me a lot of people in that last > category, and so I started thinking: could she be a witch who > *refused* to learn magic? > > Now, JKR is quoted as saying: > > "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." > (from the World Book Day Chat) > > According to this, Petunia is a muggle, but is it possible that she > *chose* to be a muggle? Could she have been born into a part- > wizarding family. and decided not to go to Hogwarts? > What is the "more" to her? > > Uncle Vernon's ignorance, I think, is largely supplicated by his > wife's opinions. I often find that people are intolerant to the very > idea of my religious faith because of some rumor they have heard, > that is either completely false, grossly overexaggerated, or taken > completely out of context. > > Is it possible that Petunia got in so far, saw something that > offended her, and decided to get out? Or wanted to live in the > (muggle) world and not change her whole lifestyle? > > I would find her character immensely interesting if this turned out > to be the case. > > imamommy > Who begs you to forgive her religious bias; it's a big part of who > she is. Iris, who begs you to forgive her if what she writes sounds like fanfiction rather than like analyze; but she has indeed a very little material to work on: Petunia as a witch who refused to learn magic: I'm not sure it could work, but that's an interesting possibility. I'm not sure it could work because of the way she behaves towards Harry and Dudley. JKR shows her giving to her son much more than he needs, for example concerning food, as if she was trying to compensate for something he doesn't have. Behind the caricature, we can also see something like guilt towards her son. Of course, that's only a supposition, because we never enter her mind. The way I see it, she probably felt very frustrated when she realized that her sister had something she would never have herself, and that Lily could enter a world she wouldn't know. When she says she saw Lily as a freak, she probably behaves like the fox in the fable. Maybe you know the story: the fox is hungry; there is a beautiful climbing vine with very mouth watering grapes, but the fox is unable to reach them. So the fox declares that the grapes are sour and that only boors can like them. Magic is the grape Petunia is unable to reach. Lily was able to turn teacups into rats (PS/SS, chapter 4). The only thing Petunia could do was turning her own vexation into despise. That's simply a human average reaction. But see, maybe Petunia thought she would find one day compensation. There was a gift in the family, maybe she could reach it through her marriage or her descendants. I don't know, but in OotP, when she talks about "that awful boy", it could reveal more than a mere aversion. She finally married Vernon Dursley. And then she had Dudley. Maybe she was hoping her son would do what she couldn't have done herself (you probably know the clich? of the mother who wants her daughter to become a ballerina because it was her own inaccessible dream when she was a little girl hem, lucky Dudley isn't a girl; imagine what he would look like with a tutu). After all, there was already a witch in the family; maybe she hoped her son would share the gift. But he didn't, and maybe she felt guilty towards him. It was at the same time a new frustration (she was definitely unable to share what had been given to her sister) and guilt. So she started spoiling her son and she adopted her husband's narrow point of view. And one day, famous Albus Dumbledore came and left baby Harry on her doorstep, with a letter probably saying the precious infant had defeated a powerful dark wizard. Poor Petunia. She had by now the obligation to care for a little boy who happened to represent everything she and her son couldn't have, or couldn't be. She had to care for an over gifted little wonder. The kid wasn't able to talk or to walk, but he was already stronger than her sister, stronger than a dark wizard. He was more gifted than her, more gifted than her son. And she had to care for him, with the perspective of watching him join one day the unreachable magical world Dumbledore was requiring more than a duty; he was requiring a sacrifice. We know what happened next, when the door of 4 Privet Drive closed on Harry. We can understand Petunia, because she finally pictures our own weaknesses of average, common people. When you talk about "a grey area in the middle", imamommy, you give a very good definition of Petunia's situation. She's a Muggle but she doesn't ignore wizards exist. That's a big difference between her and other Muggles. Her psychological situation isn't comfortable at all. She knows there's something else, but she can't reach it, and it's probably very frustrating and disturbing. She knows a secret, but she can't share it with other people, except with her husband. She's doomed to a silent sacrifice, but she didn't choose it. As for forgiving her the way she treated her nephew, that's another challenge, and another possible thread. It depends on your own capacity to forgive. Personally, I can understand the reasons why she acted that way. But I can't give her my support, because of her behaviour. Harry wasn't responsible for what had happened before he was born, or for Petunia's Muggle condition and frustration. But she made him pay the cost, deliberately, and IMO, that's what makes look more monstrous than ridiculous or pathetic. She didn't choose her Muggle condition, she probably suffered from it, but on another hand, she chose to abuse Harry. And there, she parallels Tom Marvolo Riddle's behaviour, which didn't choose to be Half Blood, to be an orphan, but did choose to become Lord Voldemort. Well, I didn't think that one day I would have so much to tell about Petunia. Sorry if it happens to be too far fetched, Amicalement, Iris From R.Vink2 at chello.nl Wed Dec 22 10:34:53 2004 From: R.Vink2 at chello.nl (Renee) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 10:34:53 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120357 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lupinlore" wrote: > > I certainly disagree that emotional responses to plot and character > are out of place here. This is not an academic discussion of the > mechanics of JKR's writing, nor is it an exercise in applying one > literary theory or another, or in arguing which literary theory is > most appropriate for analysis of canon, or in constructing formal > arguments according to any particular rules of evidence or procedure. > It is a forum for discussing how this piece of fiction affects our > human lives. Now, if you happen to find all those things (theory and > mechanics and formal rules of evidence) to be powerful and > meaningful, then employ them by all means. However many of us aren't > particularly impressed with such approaches, as we find interacting > with this story to be primarily a human response to human characters - > - i.e. an emotional and even, to use an admittedly vague and > sometimes maligned word -- a spiritual experience. Our responses > will be emotion based, and we aren't very interested in "criticism" > as such. If you are, more power to you! But don't make the mistake > of thinking that is the only appropriate way of approaching HP, in > this forum or anywhere else, or that the tools and methods and > language of the literary critic will impress everyone, or make any > dent in the way we approach the sotry. So we *will* continue to > excoriate the Dursleys, and to argue about why Dumbledore allows > Snape to be abusive, and to decry any pernicious/morally outrageous > themes we see. You are more than welcome to participate in the > threads or sail right past them, just as we will likely sail past > threads trying to view the Dursleys as a plot element, or arguing > about Snape's place in the narrative arc, or relating the > moral/ethical structure of Hogwarts to the practices of the Edwardian > public school. > > Lupinlore Renee: Relatively short answer to long post: Why not do both? Are analysis and emotional respons really two entirely separate compartments? An emotional response can lead to the question: why do we react like we do, and this can create a demand for analysis. And the analysis in its turn can lead to a better understanding. From spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com Wed Dec 22 11:13:50 2004 From: spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com (dungrollin) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 11:13:50 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120358 Lupinlore wrote: So we *will* continue to > excoriate the Dursleys, and to argue about why Dumbledore allows > Snape to be abusive, and to decry any pernicious/morally outrageous > themes we see. You are more than welcome to participate in the > threads or sail right past them, just as we will likely sail past > threads trying to view the Dursleys as a plot element, or arguing > about Snape's place in the narrative arc, or relating the > moral/ethical structure of Hogwarts to the practices of the Edwardian > public school. But we *don't* just sail right past them, do we? Someone trying to clinically examine Snape's role in the story from the perspective of narrative structure will inevitably be accused of defending abusive behaviour, no matter *how* many times they try to explain that they're not making value judgements about the characters. Elegantly demonstrated by at least one current thread. We leap gleefully into the fray not realising that we're wearing the wrong hat for the discussion (occasionally not even checking), and because we *have* to have the last word (even when it's clear that we're coming at the argument from completely different angles - or 'planets', as we say on my world) discussions become arguments and they run and run and run. Dungrollin From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Wed Dec 22 11:17:10 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 11:17:10 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120359 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ms_luna_knows" wrote: > > I also agree that events in the graveyard were enough to make Harry > grow up, but I also think that there is more to it, such as the > teenager's angst that has exploded in him during the OOP, made more > explosive by the graveyard events. Because IMO what makes the last > book so uncomfortable to read was Harry's VERY hormone induced, > teenage way of "handling" things...I kept asking myself why doesn't > Harry do this or that to relieve his "guilt/attitude"....but the > hormones have kidnapped his brain and he can do nothing without that > getting in his way. (I know, I live with a 13 year old boy/teenager > who thinks he can "handle" things.) > Yep, teenage angst could be the explanation, or part of it at least. But there's something else that might be coming into play, something that is *specific* to Harry - the Voldy fragment. I've opined before that the graveyard episode where Voldy eliminates Harry's protection might not just make him vulnerable to outside influences but to internal ones too - that fragment might no longer be restrained and not just Voldy powers but Voldy personality is starting to show too. I find it interesting that none of the other teenagers are showing similar temper tantrums and bloody-mindedness. Kneasy From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Dec 22 12:08:16 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 12:08:16 -0000 Subject: First Riddle on JKR's website (Website Spoiler See it yourself First ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120360 Carol: > As the only half-bloods who've been identified so far (IIRC) are > Harry, Tom Riddle, and Seamus Finnegan, the first two have been > ruled out by JKR herself and the last is unlikely in the extreme, > I'm voting for a newcomer, probably Felix Felicis. I'm also > betting that he's the lionlike man of an earlier website > revelation and (90 % certainty this time) that he's the new DADA > instructor. SSSusan: I think Felix Felicis is a good guess, but I did want to point out that if you're considering things JKR has stated at her website/in interviews, she's also identified Lupin as half-blood in the World Book Day chat. > Carol, who will be extremely disappointed if the HBP is part giant > or part goblin. (Bad enough that we have to put up with Grawp.) Siriusly Snapey Susan, who also wishes we'd already seen the last of Grawp From carolynwhite2 at aol.com Wed Dec 22 12:28:43 2004 From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (carolynwhite2) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 12:28:43 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120361 Kneasy, originally [120202]: >>Trouble can arise when posters closely identify HP with the RW and others don't. I'm one of the don'ts. It's most definitely not the RW so why try to equate one with the other? I just can't comprehend why folk should get so worked up about so-called abuse and emotional trauma when it's a 'given' of the story, when it's *deliberately* contrived and constructed by the author.<<< Lupinlore [120352]: >>Now, OOTP is *not* a modern fairy tale. It is something rather like a dark melodrama with magical elements. That is a totally different genre. We respond very, very differently to melodrama than we do to modern fairy tales. Things that do not necessarily raise our ire in fairy tales *do* in melodrama.<<< >>Another way of putting it is, did JKR intend to create the kind of emotional backlash she did with OOTP? I rather doubt it. I'm sure she intended to be provocative and surprising. I'm not at all sure she intended to generate the kind of distaste and anger she has in a lot of quarters.<<< Lupinlore [120353]: >>>I certainly disagree that emotional responses to plot and character are out of place here. This is not an academic discussion of the mechanics of JKR's writing, nor is it an exercise in applying one literary theory or another, or in arguing which literary theory is most appropriate for analysis of canon, or in constructing formal arguments according to any particular rules of evidence or procedure.<< >>>It is a forum for discussing how this piece of fiction affects our human lives. Now, if you happen to find all those things (theory and mechanics and formal rules of evidence) to be powerful and meaningful, then employ them by all means. However many of us aren't particularly impressed with such approaches, as we find interacting with this story to be primarily a human response to human characters - i.e. an emotional and even, to use an admittedly vague and sometimes maligned word -- a spiritual experience. Our responses will be emotion based, and we aren't very interested in "criticism" as such.<< Carolyn: Lupinlore, your two responses quoted above are somewhat contradictory. On the one hand you comment as to what kind of books these are, and attempt to state what our responses should be to each type of genre (as if there was any agreement about that), plus make unprovable statements about what JKR intended. Then you change tack and say that anyway, formal theoretical literary approaches are totally irrelevant, and the only thing that really matters (to you) is (your) emotional response. You appear familiar with literary criticism as a discipline, therefore you must be aware that these two positions are merely opposite (and very well-known) positions within, well, literary theory? In particular, the arguments about authorial intent rage on continuously. It's a tad disingenuous not to be more upfront about this if you are going to make a strong argument for one type of reading over another. I also don't think it helps to make sweeping statements about 'what this forum is about'. There are many academics on this board, and if they want to have their say, that's fine by me. I'd even argue it is a good thing to try and test theoretical analyses against the kind of robust non-academic reader response to be found on HPfGU. I originally studied lit at college many years ago, and have never regretted the breadth of perspective it has given me on what writers may (or may not) be trying to do with a book. At the same time, it is self-evident to anyone with a grain of commonsense that many academic contributions are farcically ivory-tower, and the only useful response to the authors is that they should get out more. HPfGU offers them this (virtual) option. Renee [120357] in response to Lupinlore: >>Relatively short answer to long post: Why not do both? Are analysis and emotional respons really two entirely separate compartments? An emotional response can lead to the question: why do we react like we do, and this can create a demand for analysis. And the analysis in its turn can lead to a better understanding.<<< Carolyn: I entirely agree, with the proviso that both types of analysis are kept focused on the work that JKR has created. Unfortunately what tends to happen is that discussions about the Potterverse quickly become lightening conductors for debates about RL issues, and then the discussion deteriorates into the kind of slanging match seen the other night. Much heat, no light. Kneasy [120202]: >>What amazes me is that so many posters are so ignorant of what has gone before on the site.<< Carolyn: Yep, you said it. Just to prove the point, I commend everyone to two posts from the archives which discuss the validity of different responses to the books. They are as relevant today as they were two years ago. Where's the Canon? (Part One): http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/34802 Where's the Canon? (Part Two): http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/34811 (Anyone interested in reading more of the great Elkins' posts can see them all collected together here at: http://elkins.theennead.com/hp/ ). Finally, those concerned about authorial intent should perhaps note JKR's comments, from the Edinburgh chat, Aug 2004: Q:If you could be one of the characters for a day, who would it be? A: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. At the moment, I would not want to be any of them, because life is getting quite tough for them. It would be a laugh to be someone like Peeves, causing mayhem and not bothering. Carolyn From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Wed Dec 22 13:47:01 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 13:47:01 -0000 Subject: Aunt Petunia (was Re: Theoretical boundaries) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120362 Imamommy wrote: "Petunia is a muggle, but is it possible that she *chose* to be a muggle? Could she have been born into a part-wizarding family. and decided not to go to Hogwarts?" Iris answered: "Petunia as a witch who refused to learn magic: I'm not sure it could work, but that's an interesting possibility. I'm not sure it could work because of the way she behaves towards Harry and Dudley. JKR shows her giving to her son much more than he needs, for example concerning food, as if she was trying to compensate for something he doesn't have." Del replies: There's another take on Aunt Petunia's spoiling of Dudley. It has been presented many times on this board, and I think it could make a lot of sense. What if Aunt Petunia spoiled Dudley to *prevent* him from exhibiting magic? If imamommy's theory is right, and Aunt Petunia is actually a witch who hates magic and decided to live as a Muggle, then her biggest fear would naturally be that Dudley might turn out to be a wizard too. We can reasonably assume that parents are not informed about their children's magical ability until they receive the Hogwarts letter. So Petunia would have no way of knowing, when Dudley was born, whether her son was indeed magical or not. And she knows from personal experience that magical kids can do accidental magic when they are under intense emotions. So maybe she figured that by spoiling Dudley, she could prevent him from getting upset enough to show magic and to discover his magical nature. That would help explain why they were so upset to have to care for an *obviously* magical child : because it might give ideas to Dudley. So maybe they figured that by making Harry hateful to Dudley, their son wouldn't wish to be a wizard himself if he ever learned of Harry's magical abilities. But if this theory is true, then it seems they did all this for nothing, since Dudley is very much a Muggle. Del, who wonders what church imamommy belongs to, because it sure sounds a lot like her own church ;-) From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Wed Dec 22 13:54:17 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 13:54:17 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120363 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dungrollin" wrote: > > > But we *don't* just sail right past them, do we? Someone trying to > clinically examine Snape's role in the story from the perspective of > narrative structure will inevitably be accused of defending abusive > behaviour, no matter *how* many times they try to explain that > they're not making value judgements about the characters. Elegantly > demonstrated by at least one current thread. > > We leap gleefully into the fray not realising that we're wearing the > wrong hat for the discussion (occasionally not even checking), and > because we *have* to have the last word (even when it's clear that > we're coming at the argument from completely different angles - > or 'planets', as we say on my world) discussions become arguments > and they run and run and run. > I don't think you'll make much of an impression, sadly. There's a conflict in how the books are approached, I think. It looks as if the main split is between those that see the WW from their own perspective and those that try to see the WW from the character's perspective. The one brings the characters into their world, the other goes into the characters world. The two will never be congruent. Seeing Harry in the limited terms of one's own attitudes and experiences seems to defeat the whole object of reading a magical fantasy; we're looking at an imaginative 'other' and though comparisons between the WW and ours may be interesting and even valid to a certain extent, to castigate the cast because they act in ways different from us seems pointless. Of course they're somewhat different with somewhat different values, the books would be pretty flat if they were just a confirmation of our own prejudices. I like the WW; I particularly like it's differences, the different flavour, tone, call it what you will. Others don't seem comfortable with this. I see that as their problem, not mine. If they don't have sufficient imagination or objectivity to put aside the real and immerse themselves whole-heartedly in the fictional, well.... I remember a fragment from another book, can't remember which off-hand, but set in the future and old books are being precied and condensed. Moby Dick is categorised thus: "Nineteenth Century knowledge of Cetaceans was erroneous." It doesn't do to shine too hard a light on the wondrous. Kneasy From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Wed Dec 22 14:14:09 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 14:14:09 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120364 Alla wrote: "Let's go back to the themes. First of all abuse and these dreaded Dursleys. I am not really sure why people are saying that Rowling suddenly introduced abuse as theme in OOP, while in my opinion the abuse was presented VERY consistently throught the books." Del replies: I disagree. In the first books, the abuse is presented as something comical. In the last book, it's presented almost exclusively as something dark and sinister. This is not a consistent presentation. Alla wrote: "I mean, sure, Dursleys looked much more caricature like in the earlier books," Del replies: Exactly! They were caricatures and then suddenly they are real. Inconsistent. Alla wrote: "BUT Harry's suffering was VERY real," Del replies: Harry's suffering was real, but it was never *presented* to us before as painful. The narrator told us about the abuse Harry suffered, but he did it in a dismissive way, he always presented it as a highly funny thing. And then suddenly he presents it in a very serious and tragic way. Inconsistent. Alla wrote: " Am I being confusing again? I disagree that abuse theme SUDDENLY appeared in OOP. I think it was always there, just looked a bit more fairytale like." Del replies: The theme was always present, agreed. But it was always presented as a fairy-tale abuse, which is widely different from presenting it as a real-life abuse, as Lupinlore so beautifully explains in her (it's her, right? I've got a doubt suddenly...) post. Lupinlore wrote: "Now, the question is, what do we make of this change in tone. It is, as a narrative technique, good writing or not? And that is very subjective. Some find it original and fresh. Others, a great many, aren't so sure. By changing genre, JKR in effect changes the rules about what can and cannot be expected. Is that interesting, or is it a form of narrative cheating? One of my friends upon reading OOTP was highly insulted, as she saw it as an exercise in JKR taunting her readers, in effect saying "AHA! Gotcha! You *thought* you knew what was going on but I fooled you!" I wouldn't go that far, but I'm not prepared to say I think the sudden change in tone was a particularly good idea. One can make all sorts of intellectual arguments as to why it's appropriate, given the developing age of the characters, etc., but as a *narrative* technique, i.e. as a method used to tell a story, it left a lot of people with a sour taste in their mouths, and set the stage for the enormous emotional backlash we've seen the last couple of years." Del replies: I couldn't agree more! I think our main problem, though, is that HP is an uncomplete series. What we see as a change in tone might just be the next step in the natural evolution in the overall tone of the whole series. The tone of the series *has* grown darker with each book after all, but many readers (me first) still retained the overall pleasant tone of the first book. Maybe by the time the series is complete, we will realise that the change of tone was natural? Though I still think it wasn't handled very well in OoP. Del From yutu75es at yahoo.es Wed Dec 22 14:49:12 2004 From: yutu75es at yahoo.es (fridwulfa) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 15:49:12 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: First Riddle on JKR's website (Website Spoiler See it yourself First ) References: Message-ID: <004c01c4e835$682c9740$2101a8c0@portatil> No: HPFGUIDX 120365 Sorry to discourage your theories, as interesting as they are, but JK herself has something to say about them, go check her site. Cheers, Fridwulfa ----- Original Message ----- From: "cubfanbudwoman" To: Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2004 1:08 PM Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: First Riddle on JKR's website (Website Spoiler See it yourself First ) > > > Carol: >> As the only half-bloods who've been identified so far (IIRC) are >> Harry, Tom Riddle, and Seamus Finnegan, the first two have been >> ruled out by JKR herself and the last is unlikely in the extreme, >> I'm voting for a newcomer, probably Felix Felicis. I'm also >> betting that he's the lionlike man of an earlier website >> revelation and (90 % certainty this time) that he's the new DADA >> instructor. > > > SSSusan: > I think Felix Felicis is a good guess, but I did want to point out > that if you're considering things JKR has stated at her website/in > interviews, she's also identified Lupin as half-blood in the World > Book Day chat. > > >> Carol, who will be extremely disappointed if the HBP is part giant >> or part goblin. (Bad enough that we have to put up with Grawp.) > > Siriusly Snapey Susan, who also wishes we'd already seen the last of > Grawp > > > > > > > > > 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 > > > > > > > From ginamiller at jis.nashville.org Wed Dec 22 15:15:45 2004 From: ginamiller at jis.nashville.org (Miller, Gina (JIS)) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 09:15:45 -0600 Subject: goblet pic on ebay Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120366 If anyone is interested there is a new pic of Harry and Hermione from the GOF on ebay! Type in Goble of Fire 8x10 it looks like either the Quiddich World Cup or Triwizard as they are in a tent! Gina A. Miller Juvenile Court 100 Woodland Street Nashville, TN 37213 615-880-2380 GinaMiller at jis.nashville.org [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From gbannister10 at aol.com Wed Dec 22 15:31:55 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 15:31:55 -0000 Subject: Doesn't she know? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120367 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Inge" > wrote: > > I know - I know.... it's her story etc. etc. etc. Of course she > knows > > best. > > But! (and here's the link > > > http://users.atw.hu/mkepek/galleries/filmek/azkaban/extra/038_by_jkr. > j > > pg (hope it works?) Geoff: I hope I attributed this to the correct writer... If you are following the above link, make sure you have the .jpg on the end (clicking on the post link left mine off initially), otherwise you end up at an incomprehensible and non-HP location, unless you speak Hungarian. If you also follow http://users.atw.hu/ you will find a home page with a link "Filmek/Film" with a picture of Harry (I think these change) and then you can follow links to the various films. An interesting one is "Filmek/Films - Tuz - Serlege/GOF" From willsonkmom at msn.com Wed Dec 22 15:32:26 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 15:32:26 -0000 Subject: Application for Head of House Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120368 Now that we can no longer debate whether Snape was really a Gryffindor, shunned by his housemates, I began to wonder about the other teachers. After all, perhaps very soon, there may need to be new appointments made for Head(s) of House. Heads of House are chosen from former house members...so, who is the running for Slytherin and Gryffindor? I hope that any openings are due to promotions or change in careers and not to the ultimate sacrifice...but there is a war going on. We know Hagrid was a Gryffindor...but with all the shenanigans that go on in Gryffindor with McGonagall as Head, it would become a real Animal House with Hagrid as Head! Any other contenders? Trelawney would make a terrible Head...but which House was hers? Ravenclaw? She lives in something of an ivory tower...but that's a stereotype that doesn't really fit Ravenclaw students. She's something of a duffer...but does that "really" describe Hufflepuffs? She could be a Gryffindor...it took courage to be the 13th member at the Christmas table. Or is she Slytherin? Hmmm. Let's see, she got Dumbledore to hire her, even though he was going to eliminate divination from the cirriculum. She has a nice safe place to live, even though she doesn't do such a great job at her job. When she was sacked not only did the Headmaster insist she keep her quarters, but the Deputy Headmistress, was openly nice to her! Cunning, don't you think? Could Sibyll Trelawney be a very Slytherin Slytherin? Any thoughts? From spinelli372003 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 22 13:42:56 2004 From: spinelli372003 at yahoo.com (spinelli372003) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 13:42:56 -0000 Subject: First Riddle on JKR's website (Website Spoiler See it yourself First ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120369 > Carol: > > I'm voting for a newcomer, probably Felix Felicis. I'm > > also betting that he's the lionlike man of an earlier website > > revelation and (90 % certainty this time) that he's the new > > DADA instructor. > > > SSSusan: > I did want to point out that she's also identified > Lupin as half-blood in the World Book Day chat. I wanted to pop in here with another half blood who has been identified. Tonks is half blood. Her mom is a witch but her father is a muggle. Remember it's why she was blasted off the tapestry in Order of the Phoenix. And also why Kreacher won't take orders from her. ETA: Ok so was having a stupid moment. Tonks can't be a prince can she lol. Maybe she has a brother that has not been mentioned yet. sherry From snow15145 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 22 15:39:39 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 15:39:39 -0000 Subject: Is Jo a member? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120370 Jo has updated her site again and it looks to me that `she' has been snooping in our forum: Rumors section the first question last sentence " I greatly enjoyed the facetious speculation about the corned beef- loving otters from Bristol, though." Sounds a lot like what moonmyyst had said in message 120257 Monday night: "(who still thinks the HBP in an otter that lives in Bristol and who eats corned beef)" Jo was watching the forums Monday night: News section " (and I do hope you consider it a decent birthday present, Delleve- who-posts-at-the-Leaky-Cauldron... not that I was watching the fansites on Monday night or anything...)" Snow From klevasseur at earthlink.net Wed Dec 22 14:55:12 2004 From: klevasseur at earthlink.net (ms_luna_knows) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 14:55:12 -0000 Subject: Aunt Petunia (was Re: Theoretical boundaries) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120371 -->> > imamommy wrote: > Aunt Petunia's behavior ..... could she be a witch who > *refused* to learn magic? > > (snip quote from the World Book Day Chat) > > According to this, Petunia is a muggle, but is it possible that > she *chose* to be a muggle? Could she have been born into a > part-wizarding family and decided not to go to Hogwarts? What > is the "more" to her? Ms. Luna here: I find this theory very interesting. It would explain why the Dursleys are trying so hard to be perceived as "normal", why their house is so abnormally clean, why their son is so abnormally spoiled...Petunia is seriously overcompensating for being a witch! It would also explain their overindulgence of Duddums...they/she wants to keep him calm so, if he were magical, magic would not accidently seep out if he were upset. This puts a new and more interesting twist on the Dursleys. I truly hope you are correct in this imamommy....I love it when story lines spin in new directions. From klevasseur at earthlink.net Wed Dec 22 15:18:20 2004 From: klevasseur at earthlink.net (ms_luna_knows) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 15:18:20 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries / Dursleys' abuse In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120372 --> > Alla wrote: > "Let's go back to the themes. First of all abuse and these dreaded > Dursleys. I am not really sure why people are saying that Rowling > suddenly introduced abuse as theme in OOP, while in my opinion the > abuse was presented VERY consistently throught the books." > > Del replies: > I disagree. In the first books, the abuse is presented as something > comical. In the last book, it's presented almost exclusively as > something dark and sinister. This is not a consistent presentation. Ms. Luna replies: We have to remember that the main character in the series is changing and with that his perceptions change. The first few books are seen through the eyes of a child the next few the child is becoming a teenager and with that he is seeing things through a teenager's eyes. And the perception of a teenager IS darker... > Alla wrote: > "I mean, sure, Dursleys looked much more caricature like in the > earlier books," > > Del replies: > Exactly! They were caricatures and then suddenly they are real. > Inconsistent. Ms. Luna again, Harry is also learning through his new experiences outside of the Dursley home that the treatment he received at the Dursleys' was abusive. He may have thought his treatment "normal" before he went to Hogwarts, because he didn't know differently. Now he KNOWS it was not normal. Remember we are seeing the abuse through Harry's eyes, and his perceptions are changing as he learns and experiences more. > Alla wrote: > "BUT Harry's suffering was VERY real," > > Del replies: > Harry's suffering was real, but it was never *presented* to us > before as painful. The narrator told us about the abuse Harry > suffered, but he did it in a dismissive way, he always presented > it as a highly funny thing. And then suddenly he presents it in a > very serious and tragic way. Inconsistent. Ms. Luna: Again, through Harry's eyes....as he grows and changes and learns, things do become more serious and tragic...let's not forget those hormones that surge through a teenagers veins... that seem to make life surrounding a teen much more tragic (even the most normal of teenager's feel the "tragedy" in their lives). Del: > I think our main problem, though, is that HP is an uncomplete > series. What we see as a change in tone might just be the next step > in the natural evolution in the overall tone of the whole series. The > tone of the series *has* grown darker with each book after all, but > many readers (me first) still retained the overall pleasant tone of > the first book. Maybe by the time the series is complete, we will > realise that the change of tone was natural? Though I still think it > wasn't handled very well in OoP. Ms. Luna: I completely agree that OoP was a hard and uncomfortable read, and that Harry's angst was not handled as well as it could have been. But at the same time, having a teenager of my own in the house, I see from where JKR is coming from with the emotionally charged Harry.... teenagers ARE emotionally charged and are hard to read and think the entire world is against them. But in Harry's case, a lot of that is "true" and he handles it as a hormone induced boy would....it's hard to read, and follow in some instances, but really true to "life'..IMHO From bob.oliver at cox.net Wed Dec 22 16:11:05 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 16:11:05 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120373 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" wrote: > > Seeing Harry in the limited terms of one's own attitudes and experiences > seems to defeat the whole object of reading a magical fantasy; we're > looking at an imaginative 'other' and though comparisons between > the WW and ours may be interesting and even valid to a certain extent, > to castigate the cast because they act in ways different from us seems > pointless. Of course they're somewhat different with somewhat different > values, the books would be pretty flat if they were just a confirmation of > our own prejudices. Don't ever make the mistake of thinking that someone in "limited" just because they are openly emotional and openly approach material from the standpoint of their own experiences. That isn't being limited, it's just being honest, and in most ways is wiser than aspiring to some sort of "neutrality" that (almost) no one can ever really reach, except as a kind of intellectual affectation. True, the books would be flat if they simply confirm what you already know and believe. However, it would also be strange if one agreed with everything the books say, assume, present, or imply, now wouldn't it? That would be a negation of self and one's own personal values, which most of us are not prepared to do. So when it comes to the Dursleys,et. al., many of us are simply not prepared to say "Oh, it's only a book." Because we have a deep emotional response based on our own values, and that matters to us. It is not limited or silly or pointless. It is an expression of our deep emotional selves. > > I like the WW; I particularly like it's differences, the different flavour, tone, > call it what you will. Others don't seem comfortable with this. I see that > as their problem, not mine. If they don't have sufficient imagination or > objectivity to put aside the real and immerse themselves whole- heartedly > in the fictional, well.... I remember a fragment from another book, can't > remember which off-hand, but set in the future and old books are being > precied and condensed. Moby Dick is categorised thus: "Nineteenth > Century knowledge of Cetaceans was erroneous." > > It doesn't do to shine too hard a light on the wondrous. If that type of immersion makes one happy, go for it by all means! But never make the mistake of thinking that such is a superior way of approaching a book or an issue. As for it being a "problem," why so? People are unhappy with certain things and find them pernicious and morally suspect, if not downright repugnant. How is it a problem to express that genuine feeling? Because it is emotional? Because it does not follow the normal routes of academic discourse? Because it requires one to be firmly based in "this world" and not "that world?" Not a problem at all! Don't ever assume people are stupid or have no imagination just because they prefer to remain grounded in real, and from their perspective, serious and important experiences. It is a different perspective, certainly, but a perfectly valid one, and a very important one. After all, if not for people like that most law, scripture (of any religion) or moral philosophy would not exist. It is, I suppose, as you alluded to in an earlier post in reference to Vernon Dursley, a somewhat "middle-class" way of approaching things. So what? There's absolutely nothing wrong with a healthy middle class mentality. It is serious-minded, morally aware, and prepared to strongly assert what it feels to be correct. It is the basic foundation of orderly and civil society, and suppresses the opposite tendancies of mob rule on one side and aristocratic arrogance on the other. It is true that such a way of looking at things can be taken too far. It is true that sometimes those of us with such an outlook can be dismissive, even cruel, towards things we find frivolous, foolish, or morally destructive. So what? All mentalities can be carried too far or expressed in problematic ways. Vernon Dursley is a caracature of the middle class. Granted. But please don't think that those of us who, I daresay, share some of Vernon's values (stability, moral seriousness, and interest in a decent society) are like him, just as not every wealthy person is like the Malfoys, every intelligent person like Hermione, or every poor person like the Weasleys. Lupinlore From yutu75es at yahoo.es Wed Dec 22 16:20:05 2004 From: yutu75es at yahoo.es (fridwulfa) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 17:20:05 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Is Jo a member? References: Message-ID: <00af01c4e842$1a5218d0$2101a8c0@portatil> No: HPFGUIDX 120374 This is something I have been suspecting for a long time, I don't know, let's not forget that this one is not the only forum and she more or less says that she's been following the Leaky Cauldron forum, so maybe she read it there, moonmyyst was not the first or the only one to talk about the corned-beef-eating otter. On the other hand HPforGrownups rules!!! It wouldn't be so surprising if she had chosen HP4GU. Cheers, Fridwulfa ----- Original Message ----- From: "snow15145" To: Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2004 4:39 PM Subject: [HPforGrownups] Is Jo a member? Jo has updated her site again and it looks to me that `she' has been snooping in our forum: Rumors section.the first question.last sentence ".I greatly enjoyed the facetious speculation about the corned beef- loving otters from Bristol, though." Sounds a lot like what moonmyyst had said in message 120257 Monday night: "(who still thinks the HBP in an otter that lives in Bristol and who eats corned beef)" Jo was watching the forums Monday night: News section ".(and I do hope you consider it a decent birthday present, Delleve- who-posts-at-the-Leaky-Cauldron... not that I was watching the fansites on Monday night or anything...)" Snow 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 From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Wed Dec 22 16:23:32 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 16:23:32 -0000 Subject: First Riddle on JKR's website (Website Spoiler See it yourself First ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120375 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > As the only half-bloods who've been identified so far (IIRC) are > Harry, Tom Riddle, and Seamus Finnegan, the first two have been ruled > out by JKR herself and the last is unlikely in the extreme, I'm voting > for a newcomer, probably Felix Felicis. I'm also betting that he's the > lionlike man of an earlier website revelation and (90 % certainty this > time) that he's the new DADA instructor. > No, there's another, an adult who was identified as such in JKR's webcast in March. Lupin. Kneasy From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Wed Dec 22 16:42:03 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 16:42:03 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120376 Lupinlore wrote: "As for it being a "problem," why so?" Del replies: Nothing is ever a problem in itself. But everything can become a problem when forcefully imposed on people who have deliberately not taken it into consideration. Lupinlore wrote: "People are unhappy with certain things and find them pernicious and morally suspect, if not downright repugnant. How is it a problem to express that genuine feeling? Because it is emotional? Because it does not follow the normal routes of academic discourse? Because it requires one to be firmly based in "this world" and not "that world?"" Del replies: Agreed only if you also admit that it is no problem either if someone desires to go at it in a totally different way. You are entitled to your emotional approach, but you cannot *impose* it on anyone who declares not to be interested in it. Lupinlore wrote: "It is true that sometimes those of us with such an outlook can be dismissive, even cruel, towards things we find frivolous, foolish, or morally destructive. So what? All mentalities can be carried too far or expressed in problematic ways." Del replies: It's not the fact that you can be dismissive that matters. It's the general tendency on this board to present this view as the *only* acceptable one, which is a contradiction in itself, since not 2 people have exactly the same mentality anyway. It's also the fact that it prevents or pollutes the discussion of some issues, like Eloise Herisson's examination of Snape as a plot device got polluted by reminders that Snape is mean and nasty and generally unacceptable and by the assumption ensuing from it that we shouldn't even consider his usefulness as a plot device because someone as nasty cannot be useful in any way. Lupinlore wrote: "But please don't think that those of us who, I daresay, share some of Vernon's values (stability, moral seriousness, and interest in a decent society) are like him, just as not every wealthy person is like the Malfoys, every intelligent person like Hermione, or every poor person like the Weasleys." Del replies: And don't make the mistake of thinking that those who argue for emotionless discussions sometimes are not just as "middle-class" as you or Vernon in RL. This is a *discussion* forum about *imaginary* characters, which means that I, for example, feel free to step out of my RL morality to go and examine things from a different angle as often as I wish. I have found that it helps me define more precisely my own morality, it helps me understand why I adhere to it, what is important to me and why. Del From ibotsjfvxfst at yahoo.co.uk Wed Dec 22 17:10:33 2004 From: ibotsjfvxfst at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?Hans=20Andr=E9a?=) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 17:10:33 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Character Discussion: Lily Message-ID: <20041222171033.33426.qmail@web25101.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120377 The lily, the rose, and the lotus are traditional symbols for our deepest spiritual self, our only true and immortal self, our inner God. The imagery speaks clearly. A seed falls into the dark, slimy, rotting earth. A plant rises up and one day produces a breathtakingly beautiful and dazzlingly pure white flower that is in such complete contrast to the environment the seed was planted in. This is not very flattering for us personally, but the idea is that we are the rotting earth and the flower is the potential Inner God in the heart. That's Lily Potter - Harry's mother. The divine flower in the heart has been symbolised in many other ways in stories through the centuries. For example a familiar one is the Philosopher's Stone. The legend about this stone is that it can produce the elixir of life and can turn all other metals into gold. Here the symbolism is clear too. The elixir of life obviously alludes to the property of the spiritual bud in the heart to give the bearer eternal life - if he uses the stone properly. Turning other metals into gold symbolises the same thing as the flower above, i.e. turning something worthless into something very beautiful. Gold is a very powerful symbol because we all know it doesn't oxidise and so doesn't tarnish. There is an additional meaning to gold, because advanced seekers on the path of liberation have told us that when the flower in the heart has opened up fully and its heavenly fragrance has spread throughout the body, the aura of the seeker takes on an exquisite golden radiance. This is especially so around the head, and this is where the legend of the aureole or halo began. We can see this depicted in medieval paintings. Jo uses the symbol of the Philosopher's Stone in quite a different way than the above, though. She uses it to make the very opposite point! She uses it as occult symbolism and the elixir of life here means life in the physical body, and gold means wealth on earth. This is quite an unexpected use of symbolism, but extremely effective. Another effective symbol for the immortal life in the heart is the seed. I quote Meister Eckhart: "The seed of God is in us. Now the seed of a pear tree grows into a pear tree; and a hazel seed grows into a hazel tree; a seed of God grows into God." What an effective symbol that is! We know that a seed is full of potential and that a small acorn can grow into a mighty oak which needs ten men to girth it. The seed is especially interesting in discussing Harry Potter, because we know that to create a plant, a seed has to die. Perhaps this is the message of why Lily sacrificed herself for Harry, symbolically speaking. The potential dies so the actuality can live. I have a gut feeling there's more to Lily and James' death than that, but that's all I can offer right now. If we compare Harry Potter to other stories we can see Lily represented in various ways. For example in Grimm's fairy tale, "Briar Rose", also known as "Sleeping beauty", we see another flower. Hidden behind impenetrable briars is a castle with a sleeping princess and a whole court, all asleep. If we can just accept that our self-centred life is the briars, we can awaken the "royal" life asleep in our heart. Royalty is another powerful symbol for the divine potential within. Many seekers have a suspicion that there's something special about them; that secretly they're royal. That is actually true, for the child asleep behind the briars of our temporary existence is a Prince or Princess: a child of the King of Creation. Another of Grimm's fairy tales, "The Glass Coffin", is similar to "Briar Rose". There the divine potential is a princess asleep in a glass coffin, and jars around her contain a miniature castle, servants, etc. When the lid is lifted the princess awakens, and the castle grows back to its real size, all symbols of the "Kingdom in the midst of you". This particular fairy tale is even more relevant to Harry Potter, for guess what brings the hero to the glass coffin? A stag! We'll come to that when we discuss James. The inner God can also be symbolised by things like a diamond or another jewel. The diamond is very apt because its hardness and hence near indestructibility is a wonderful symbol for the immortality of the inner prince or princess. I hope I may be permitted to conclude by telling you what, in my opinion, the divine potential within the heart really is. As I said in my introduction to this series of posts about the characters, abstract things can be understood better (or only) by symbols. But please remember that symbols are just comparisons; they're not the thing itself! The inner God is LIKE a seed in that it can "germinate" and grow according to its "genes". The inner God is LIKE a castle in that it's capable of self-supporting life full of richness, grandeur and beauty. The inner God is LIKE a prince or princess because it's a child of the King or Architect of the universe. It's LIKE a bud because out of it can unfold a flower of dazzling purity and beauty. But it's none of these. Obviously it's not physical because we have had it through every incarnation. It's invisible, undetectable by science, and its existence is possibly denied by millions of people. Only its owner can detect it. How? By feeling that deep down he is royal. By suspecting that life on earth is not all there is. By being incessantly urged from within to seek for the purpose of life, for the causes behind the physical causes, for self-realisation as a spiritual being. And now we're starting to get close to the character of James Potter, so I'll stop here. So what is it really? In my humble opinion I think it can best be described as a divine thought-spark. Anything God creates is everlasting and indestructible. However there is the possibility of a divine thought-spark developing according to the thought contained within, or of atrophying if its potential is not realised. Millions and millions of years ago the Spirit of God flashed like a lightning bolt through the universe and in its wake it left a sea of thought-sparks. Each one of these is unique yet able to develop into a mighty god, an everlasting father, a Prince of Peace. Through a process that took an unimaginably long time, the sparks developed, and many of them grew into Sons of the Father in mind-boggling glory. But others chose to follow an experimental plan instead of the one written within their own beings. They "fell" into another universe and the thought-sparks atrophied back to a bare minimum. For those who like technical explanations; the thought-spark is actually the mathematical centre of the microcosm we inhabit. If my theory of what Harry Potter is about is correct, this means that we all have within us something so ineffably precious, so utterly sublime, so inexpressibly supernal that it should make us feel our heart is filled with a swelling balloon as Jo puts it. Just think: no matter what our physical circumstances, no matter what our role in life or where we live, we have the potential to open our hearts to the Lily within and give birth to Harry, who will go on a long and painful struggle to defeat the Voldemort within us, ending in total liberation and the restoration of the inner Prince as heir to the everlasting Kingdom. Go Harry! Hans ===== Hans Rieuwers see you at Harry Potter for Seekers http://groups.yahoo.com/group/harrypotterforseekers/ ___________________________________________________________ ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Wed Dec 22 17:10:02 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 17:10:02 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries / Dursleys' abuse In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120378 Ms. Luna wrote: "We have to remember that the main character in the series is changing and with that his perceptions change. The first few books are seen through the eyes of a child the next few the child is becoming a teenager and with that he is seeing things through a teenager's eyes. And the perception of a teenager IS darker..." Del replies: I disagree, in that the books are not seen through Harry's eyes, but through the narrator's eyes, who is NOT Harry. For example, in PS/SS, the narrator presents most of the abuse Harry is going through as *funny*, something that Harry would definitely not do! Harry might not be aware he's being abused, but there's no way he can find his childhood amusing. The narrator is NOT Harry, and he is not a child either at the beginning of the series. The way he describes the Dursleys for example shows quite clearly that he is an adult with an understanding of middle-class snobbery, something a child of 11 would barely start to be aware of. Ms. Luna wrote: " Harry is also learning through his new experiences outside of the Dursley home that the treatment he received at the Dursleys' was abusive." Del replies: *Harry* is learning that, but the *narrator* knew it all along. Proof is : he picked out the abusive episodes in Harry's childhood, something Harry himself would probably have been quite unable to do, if as you suggest he was barely aware he was being abused. Ms Luna wrote: "Remember we are seeing the abuse through Harry's eyes, and his perceptions are changing as he learns and experiences more. " Del replies: No, we are most definitely not seeing Harry's abuse through Harry's eyes. In fact, if there was ONE thing in the entire books that we can be sure we are NOT seeing through Harry's eyes, it's the abuse the Dursleys imposed on him, because this abuse is often presented as funny, when for Harry it is not. Ms. Luna wrote: "Again, through Harry's eyes....as he grows and changes and learns, things do become more serious and tragic..." Del replies: Harry is changing and that's normal. What highly disconcerting for me, though, is that the *narrator* is changing as well. The narrator of OoP is not the same narrator that told us the story of PS/SS. He changed in the meantime, became more involved with Harry. He now identifies much more strongly with Harry than he did back in the first books. IMO only of course. Ms. Luna wrote: "teenagers ARE emotionally charged and are hard to read" Del replies: Abuse is emotionally charged and should be hard to read. And yet in the first books, the Dursley abuse was singularly non-emotionally charged and very easy and funny to read. It's not the subject : it's the way it's presented. It's not Harry, it's the narrator. Del From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Wed Dec 22 17:58:08 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 17:58:08 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120379 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lupinlore" wrote: > > Don't ever make the mistake of thinking that someone in "limited" > just because they are openly emotional and openly approach material > from the standpoint of their own experiences. That isn't being > limited, it's just being honest, and in most ways is wiser than > aspiring to some sort of "neutrality" that (almost) no one can ever > really reach, except as a kind of intellectual affectation. True, > the books would be flat if they simply confirm what you already know > and believe. However, it would also be strange if one agreed with > everything the books say, assume, present, or imply, now wouldn't > it? That would be a negation of self and one's own personal values, > which most of us are not prepared to do. > Kneasy: One's own experiences are limiting - when one imposes them on fictional characters. There is a risk that the personae will be reduced to paradigms of one's own past rather than develop, explain or illuminate as the writer intends. "Agreeing" is not the stance I've been on about - it's "accepting." Accepting the book on the terms that the author places on the page - the similarities, the differences between the WW and the RW specifically outlined in this book and the tale it tells. Whether the author, or reader come to that, agrees with what an author presents us with is irrelevant, it's whether it makes a coherent whole, whether it *works*. I don't agree with the concepts and behaviour in Orwell's 1984, but I do consider them valid within the confines of the story. Consequently I don't see the need to beat my breast and impress on everyone that I believe O'Brien shouldn't do those things. lupinlore: > If that type of immersion makes one happy, go for it by all means! > But never make the mistake of thinking that such is a superior way of > approaching a book or an issue. > Kneasy: Did I mention the word superior? No, I don't think I did. I mentioned two possible approaches; I stated which I prefer and why I prefer it. lupinlore: > As for it being a "problem," why so? People are unhappy with certain > things and find them pernicious and morally suspect, if not downright > repugnant. How is it a problem to express that genuine feeling? > Because it is emotional? Because it does not follow the normal > routes of academic discourse? Because it requires one to be firmly > based in "this world" and not "that world?" Not a problem at all! > > Don't ever assume people are stupid or have no imagination just > because they prefer to remain grounded in real, and from their > perspective, serious and important experiences. It is a different > perspective, certainly, but a perfectly valid one, and a very > important one. After all, if not for people like that most law, > scripture (of any religion) or moral philosophy would not exist. > Kneasy: Just who is making assumptions here? Have I "assumed" that anyone is stupid? I'm not such a fool that I think anyone who disagrees with me is half-witted. It seems to me that you are conducting the same exercise that you appear to with the books - you're taking your own experiences and projecting them onto me. Unjustifiably and erroneously. And you have no monopoly on experiences. I've watched children die; held their hands while they did so, too. That makes a vast difference; to me, fiction is nothing like the real thing and never can be. I cannot behave or pretend to behave as if it were. Equating *my* past experiences with a character in a light novel would be to debase and devalue real people and real tragedy. Maybe I'm old fashioned. I consider my emotions to be intensely personal. I would find it distasteful and an imposition on others to spread them all over a web-site. I'm of the generation that considered public displays of such matters to be ill-mannered and unnecessary. Others apparently think differently. lupilore: > It is, I suppose, as you alluded to in an earlier post in reference > to Vernon Dursley, a somewhat "middle-class" way of approaching > things. So what? There's absolutely nothing wrong with a healthy > middle class mentality. It is serious-minded, morally aware, and > prepared to strongly assert what it feels to be correct. > snip> > Vernon Dursley is a caracature of the middle class. Granted. But > please don't think that those of us who, I daresay, share some of > Vernon's values (stability, moral seriousness, and interest in a > decent society) are like him, just as not every wealthy person is > like the Malfoys, every intelligent person like Hermione, or every > poor person like the Weasleys. > Kneasy: See post 92428 for a defence of Vernon and the values he probably espouses. I strongly recommend reading my back posts before jumping to conclusions about where I stand. Yes, he is a caricature, intentionally so. We agree. What we won't agree on is the utility of employing a fictional caricature as an opportunity to show one cares about real people. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 22 18:06:06 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 18:06:06 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120380 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lupinlore" wrote: If that type of immersion makes one happy, go for it by all means! But never make the mistake of thinking that such is a superior way of approaching a book or an issue. As for it being a "problem," why so? People are unhappy with certain things and find them pernicious and morally suspect, if not downright repugnant. How is it a problem to express that genuine feeling? Because it is emotional? Because it does not follow the normal routes of academic discourse? Because it requires one to be firmly based in "this world" and not "that world?" Not a problem at all! > Don't ever assume people are stupid or have no imagination just because they prefer to remain grounded in real, and from their perspective, serious and important experiences. It is a different perspective, certainly, but a perfectly valid one, and a very important one. After all, if not for people like that most law, scripture (of any religion) or moral philosophy would not exist. > Alla: Bravo! You said it much better that I would ever hoped to say. One of my favourite topics was and always will be moral and ethics of the characters and yes their application to RL. I perfectly realise that it is not everybody's favourite cup of tea. It is MINE. Everybody who does not like that topic... is invited not to read it. That is what I am doing with some conspiracy theories ( not all, but some of them) - I SKIP those topics, because after I familiarised myself very WELL with them, I realised that I don't care for them. Despite that fact, just as you I don't LIKE being called person "without imagination" because I don't care for certain topics. Tolerance does not work one way only, it is a two way street, IMO. I am interested in the plot of the series as far as it helps me to figure out the characters. Do I want to know how everything ends ? Of course, but the main reason I want to know that is because I want to see what kind of person Harry becomes BECAUSE of how it all ends? Do I want to know about relationship between Marauders and Snape? Of course but mainly because I want to figure out what kind of people they were and became. One of my criteria for evaluating whether the book is good or not ( and I realise that it is very subjective one) is whether I would want to read it again or not. When I read mystery story, for the most part I know that I NEVER come back to this book again, unless it also has interesting characters in it. Therefore if HP books were ONLY mystery story, I would not like them as much as I am now. Everybody is approaching the books differently. When I don't care for particular approach, I don't participate in it. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 22 18:18:02 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 18:18:02 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120381 > > Kneasy: > Just who is making assumptions here? Have I "assumed" that > anyone is stupid? I'm not such a fool that I think anyone who > disagrees with me is half-witted. Alla: See your post 120363. "If they don't have sufficient imagination or objectivity to put aside the real and immerse themselves whole- heartedly in the fictional, well.... I remember a fragment from another book, can't remember which off-hand, but set in the future and old books are being precied and condensed. Moby Dick is categorised thus: "Nineteenth Century knowledge of Cetaceans was erroneous."" It doesn't do to shine too hard a light on the wondrous" Yes, to me to say that somebody does not have sufficient imagination to do something is very close to calling person stupid. Kneasy: Maybe I'm old fashioned. I consider my emotions to be intensely personal. I would find it distasteful and an imposition on others to spread them all over a web-site. I'm of the generation that considered public displays of such matters to be ill-mannered and unnecessary.Others apparently think differently. Alla: Yes, apparently they do. From Vivamus at TaprootTech.com Wed Dec 22 18:29:38 2004 From: Vivamus at TaprootTech.com (Vivamus) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 13:29:38 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Aunt Petunia (was Re: Theoretical boundaries) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200412221330197.SM01224@devbox> No: HPFGUIDX 120382 > imamommy wrote: > > Aunt Petunia's behavior ..... could she be a witch who > > *refused* to learn magic? > > > > (snip quote from the World Book Day Chat) > > > > According to this, Petunia is a muggle, but is it possible that she > > *chose* to be a muggle? Could she have been born into a > > part-wizarding family and decided not to go to Hogwarts? > What is the > > "more" to her? > > > Ms. Luna here: > > I find this theory very interesting. It would explain why > the Dursleys are trying so hard to be perceived as "normal", > why their house is so abnormally clean, why their son is so > abnormally spoiled...Petunia is seriously overcompensating > for being a witch! It would also explain their > overindulgence of Duddums...they/she wants to keep him calm > so, if he were magical, magic would not accidently seep out > if he were upset. > This puts a new and more interesting twist on the Dursleys. I truly > hope you are correct in this imamommy....I love it when story > lines spin > in new directions. Vivamus: I, too, like this. In addition to what you have said here, it also puts a more believable basis on her knowledge of the dementors and Azkaban. Given her almost hysterical effort to suppress, repress and ignore any connection with the magical world, the thought that she would even retain that bit of information for all those years suggests she had a much deeper connection with the WW than might first appear. Here is the question this begs for me, though: If Petunia is a witch who has chosen to be a muggle, does VERNON know? Can you imagine the furor at that revelation? Vivamus, who finds the concept of Petunia doing accidental magic in front of her son particularly giggle-worthy From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 22 18:31:45 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 18:31:45 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120383 > Del replies: Agreed only if you also admit that it is no problem either if someone desires to go at it in a totally different way. You are entitled to your emotional approach, but you cannot *impose* it on anyone who declares not to be interested in it. Alla: Absolutely agreed, but what do you mean by "imposing" if we debate the same topic? > Del replies: This is a *discussion* forum about *imaginary* characters, which means that I, for example, feel free to step out of my RL morality to go and examine things from a different angle as often as I wish. I have found that it helps me define more precisely my own morality, it helps me understand why I adhere to it, what is important to me and why. Alla: Absolutely, I can also step out of my RL morality and can understand when other people do it, I am only saying that I don't like being told that evaluating characters from the position of my RL morality is invalid. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 22 18:34:40 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 18:34:40 -0000 Subject: One last try (re: Parenting Harry ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120384 > Renee: Basically, yes. When discussing the technical side of storytelling - how the effects are brought about, how the elements of the story are put together, etc., I find that having strong opinions about the characters tends to obscure my views of how they function in the story. Snape the character is allowed to push my buttons, but if I want to talk about Snape the plot device, Snape the metaphor, Snape the archetype, or whatever, I try to take a step back and be as objective as possible. Actually, when approached at this level, Snape isn't a character anymore but an object of study. Alla: Thank you, I finally got it. :o) So, on this level no value judgments about the character can be made, right? Only how well he fits in the plot and what is his function storyline-wise, correct? From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 22 18:58:41 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 18:58:41 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120385 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lupinlore" wrote: I think what I and others are getting at when we talk about inconsistency is *MAINLY* tone -- although I do still think there are issues with characterization, that isn't what I'm talking about here. Because the books are linked together, when the tone shifts, our view of the events in the earlier books is suddenly wrenched into a different mode. What was not problematic before, because it was a fairy tale, IS now. Now, the question is, what do we make of this change in tone. It is, as a narrative technique, good writing or not? And that is very subjective. Some find it original and fresh. Others, a great many, aren't so sure. By changing genre, JKR in effect changes the rules about what can and cannot be expected. Is that interesting, or is it a form of narrative cheating? One of my friends upon reading OOTP was highly insulted, as she saw it as an exercise in JKR taunting her readers, in effect saying "AHA! Gotcha! You *thought* you knew what was going on but I fooled you!" I wouldn't go that far, but I'm not prepared to say I think the sudden change in tone was a particularly good idea. One can make all sorts of intellectual arguments as to why it's appropriate, given the developing age of the characters, etc., but as a *narrative* technique, i.e. as a method used to tell a story, it left a lot of people with a sour taste in their mouths, and set the stage for the enormous emotional backlash we've seen the last couple of years. Alla: Oh, I get it finally, I think. :o) Yes, even though I find characterisation to be consistent, I do agree that tone of the narration had changed. Definitely. Let me see whether I can express clearly why it did not bother me at all. Maybe because subconsciously I WANTED the tone to change. I was afraid that after Graveyard we won't see any consequences for Harry. I am glad I was wrong. Maybe because I read too many fanfic stories,where authors predicted tone change to the darker one, that is why I was not so surprised. I would found it strange if the tone would not change with Voldemort return, I suppose. But I do understand what you are saying. Maybe I did not expect such huge change in the tone, but yes, I found it to be appropriate for this book. Lupinlore: Another way of putting it is, did JKR intend to create the kind of emotional backlash she did with OOTP? I rather doubt it. I'm sure she intended to be provocative and surprising. I'm not at all sure she intended to generate the kind of distaste and anger she has in a lot of quarters. Now, I think this is due to the fact, as I've said before, that she doesn't realize what the implications of the story seem like to somebody who's coming at it fresh without her years of pondering it. For instance, I really rather doubt she intended for people to react so negatively to Dumbledore. But that is because she has dwelled with this story so long she in effect didn't realize what she was saying when she had him say and do a lot of the stuff he did in OOTP. Oh, I think she meant to humanize him and show his flaws. I *don't* think she meant him to come off as stupidly as he does, or to raise all the moral issues OOTP raises -- such as all the Snape/Dursley abuse stuff. > > Wow, long answer. But I'm still just grazing the surface of this, > which is enormously complicated and can be rather subtle. But I > *think* I've touched the main point. Let me know if I have not. Alla: Yes, you did. The funny thing is that I at first wanted to say that I disagree with your assertion that JKR did not intend to create such emotional reaction to OOP, but when you gave Dumbledore as an example, I think I may agree. Indeed, nowhere in the interviews she even hints that she considers Dumbledore to be manipulative, puppet master, whatever, he is always very wise man, epithome of goodness, etc. Maybe you are right that she did not intend to create such reaction towards Dumbledore, but it happened nevertheless. From willsonkmom at msn.com Wed Dec 22 19:10:27 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 19:10:27 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120386 > Alla: > > Yes, you did. The funny thing is that I at first wanted to say that I > disagree with your assertion that JKR did not intend to create such > emotional reaction to OOP, but when you gave Dumbledore as an > example, I think I may agree. > > Indeed, nowhere in the interviews she even hints that she considers > Dumbledore to be manipulative, puppet master, whatever, he is always > very wise man, epithome of goodness, etc. > > Maybe you are right that she did not intend to create such reaction > towards Dumbledore, but it happened nevertheless. Potioncat: If you really want to get people's blood boiling, bring up Molly as the topic of discussion. I would bet that JKR sees Molly as a loving, somewhat overextended Mum who does her best and loves all her children dearly. I think that of course, because that's what I think Molly is. At least half the members on this list would disagree! Who knows what JKR really thinks about Molly? My point, if indeed I have one, is that we bring all sorts of filters and magnifying glasses and emotions and levels of intellect to these stories. We add to and take from what's written. Then we run it through the meat grinder that is HPFGU. I hope JKR doesn't spend too much time at his site. I don't think it would be any fun for her. But it's a heck of a lot of fun for the rest of us....whichever approach we take to our discussions! With admiration and respect for JKR. Potioncat From bob.oliver at cox.net Wed Dec 22 19:32:52 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 19:32:52 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120387 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > > . > > > > Kneasy: > > Maybe I'm old fashioned. I consider my emotions to be intensely > personal. I would find it distasteful and an imposition on others to > spread them all over a web-site. I'm of the generation that > considered public displays of such matters to be ill-mannered and > unnecessary.Others apparently think differently. > > > Alla: > > Yes, apparently they do. Indeed we do. I'll second you on that one, Alla. Lupinlore From antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com Wed Dec 22 19:49:37 2004 From: antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com (antoshachekhonte) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 19:49:37 -0000 Subject: Character Discussion: Lily In-Reply-To: <20041222171033.33426.qmail@web25101.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120388 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Hans Andr?a wrote: > The lily, the rose, and the lotus are traditional > symbols for our deepest spiritual self, our only true > and immortal self, our inner God. > > The imagery speaks clearly. A seed falls into the > dark, slimy, rotting earth. A plant rises up and one > day produces a breathtakingly beautiful and dazzlingly > pure white flower that is in such complete contrast to > the environment the seed was planted in. > > This is not very flattering for us personally, but the > idea is that we are the rotting earth and the flower > is the potential Inner God in the heart. That's Lily > Potter - Harry's mother. > > > If my theory of what Harry Potter is about is correct, > this means that we all have within us something so > ineffably precious, so utterly sublime, so > inexpressibly supernal that it should make us feel our > heart is filled with a swelling balloon as Jo puts it. > Just think: no matter what our physical circumstances, > no matter what our role in life or where we live, we > have the potential to open our hearts to the Lily > within and give birth to Harry, who will go on a long > and painful struggle to defeat the Voldemort within > us, ending in total liberation and the restoration of > the inner Prince as heir to the everlasting Kingdom. > Go Harry! > Hans > Antosha-- What a lovely, mythic reading of these books! In the finest folkloric tradition, of course, you've also got two failed anti-heroines, the other flower-moms (Narcissa and Petunia) whose love is nowhere near as pure, and whose fruit (Draco and Dudley) is therefore nowhere near as sweet. Of course, there are many other themes going on here. There's Father Atonement--Harry come to grips his father's legacy, positive and negative, as it manifests itself within him. There's the good old Zarathustran battle of the Sons of Light and the Sons of Darkness.... Still, Lily's sacrifice, and Harry's internalization of the meaning of that sacrifice, do seem to be the central symbol of the series, so far.... From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Wed Dec 22 19:50:04 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 19:50:04 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120389 Alla wrote: "Yes, to me to say that somebody does not have sufficient imagination to do something is very close to calling person stupid." Del replies: Dictionary.com gave me those ones: Intelligence : The capacity to acquire and apply knowledge ; the faculty of thought and reason. Imagination : The formation of a mental image of something that is neither perceived as real nor present to the senses. They don't sound similar at all to me. One is about reality, this other is about fantasy. And even within those definitions, they both can cover a whole array of very different concepts. So I personally don't equate those two concepts. And I don't consider someone with little imagination to be stupid : I've known people with tremendous intelligence and very little imagination. Del From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Wed Dec 22 19:50:42 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 19:50:42 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120390 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > > > > Kneasy: > > Just who is making assumptions here? Have I "assumed" that > > anyone is stupid? I'm not such a fool that I think anyone who > > disagrees with me is half-witted. > > > > Alla: > > See your post 120363. > > "If they don't have sufficient imagination or > objectivity to put aside the real and immerse themselves whole- > heartedly > in the fictional, well.... I remember a fragment from another book, > can't > remember which off-hand, but set in the future and old books are being > precied and condensed. Moby Dick is categorised thus: "Nineteenth > Century knowledge of Cetaceans was erroneous."" > It doesn't do to shine too hard a light on the wondrous" > Alla: > Yes, to me to say that somebody does not have sufficient imagination > to do something is very close to calling person stupid. > Kneasy: Not necessarily the same thing. Even the most intelligent can be blinkered, or so fixated on pre-conceived ideas that they ignore a wider view. > Kneasy: > Maybe I'm old fashioned. I consider my emotions to be intensely > personal. I would find it distasteful and an imposition on others to > spread them all over a web-site. I'm of the generation that > considered public displays of such matters to be ill-mannered and > unnecessary.Others apparently think differently. > > > Alla: > Yes, apparently they do. Kneasy: Unfortunately, yes; some posters seem to. Why should anyone have the slightest interest in someone else's emotional spasms (assuming they're genuine; not a given) about a non-existent youth? It would perhaps be expected from an over-wrought 14 year old overdosing on romanticism, but real grown-ups? Hardly. From bob.oliver at cox.net Wed Dec 22 19:52:00 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 19:52:00 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120391 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lupinlore" wrote: > > > > lupinlore: > > As for it being a "problem," why so? People are unhappy with certain > > things and find them pernicious and morally suspect, if not downright > > repugnant. How is it a problem to express that genuine feeling? > > Because it is emotional? Because it does not follow the normal > > routes of academic discourse? Because it requires one to be firmly > > based in "this world" and not "that world?" Not a problem at all! > > > > Don't ever assume people are stupid or have no imagination just > > because they prefer to remain grounded in real, and from their > > perspective, serious and important experiences. It is a different > > perspective, certainly, but a perfectly valid one, and a very > > important one. After all, if not for people like that most law, > > scripture (of any religion) or moral philosophy would not exist. > > > > Kneasy: > Just who is making assumptions here? Have I "assumed" that > anyone is stupid? I'm not such a fool that I think anyone who > disagrees with me is half-witted. > > It seems to me that you are conducting the same exercise that > you appear to with the books - you're taking your own experiences > and projecting them onto me. Unjustifiably and erroneously. I will agree with you that I am seeing everything through the filter of my own experiences. I can't see things any other way, and I'd be foolish to deny it. Whether it's erroneous or not is for future experience to dictate. And as for being justified -- well, it's natural and inevitable. If you find it offensive, I am sorry that your feelings are wounded. > > And you have no monopoly on experiences. I've watched children > die; held their hands while they did so, too. That makes a vast > difference; to me, fiction is nothing like the real thing and never > can be. I cannot behave or pretend to behave as if it were. > Equating *my* past experiences with a character in a light novel > would be to debase and devalue real people and real tragedy. I respect you for your experience. But you seem to think it gives your method of approaching the text some superior weight. It does not. Nor does any other kind of experience that I or anyone else might have had provide *superior* insight. However, our experience does have the weight of being *our* experience, and therefore provides the basis for our honest answers to the challenges the text brings to us. > > Maybe I'm old fashioned. I consider my emotions to be intensely > personal. I would find it distasteful and an imposition on others to > spread them all over a web-site. I'm of the generation that considered > public displays of such matters to be ill-mannered and unnecessary. > Others apparently think differently. > Yes, we do see these things differently. And it is not, in our view, either ill-mannered or unnecessary, or we would not do it. I am truly sorry you find it offensive, but then all I can do is suggest that you avoid such conversations. Perhaps we do have different modes of public discourse than were common some years ago. Once again, if that makes you uncomfortable, I'm sorry, but we aren't going to stop, and the best I can say is that if it upsets you that terribly you would be well advised to avoid it. Lupinlore From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Wed Dec 22 20:06:02 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 20:06:02 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120392 Kneasy: "Maybe I'm old fashioned. I consider my emotions to be intensely personal. I would find it distasteful and an imposition on others to spread them all over a web-site. I'm of the generation that considered public displays of such matters to be ill-mannered and unnecessary. Others apparently think differently. " Alla: Yes, apparently they do. Lupinlore: Indeed we do. I'll second you on that one, Alla. Del replies: I'm in the middle ground. I can appreciate the value of emotions in some discussions, and the value of a non-emotional approach in other discussions. There are two major problems with the emotional approach. First it's completely subjective. Everybody can and do react in a different way, which makes any discussion almost impossible, because in the end it's only a matter of "I think my emotions are more justified/acceptable/whatever than yours", which of course doesn't get us anywhere. We can't discuss each other's emotions. We can only discuss the canon's facts. Which is why, when discussing some of the canon's facts, it's not necessarily a good idea to bring in our emotions. The second major problem is that our emotions can and do interfere with our intellect. Harry is a good example of that : he's been wrong several times because he submitted the facts to the distorting filter of his emotions. He's entitled not to like Snape, for example, but when he lets that dislike colour his analysis of a situation, he wrongfully concludes that Snape is guilty (of whatever). His emotional response to Snape is perfectly valid, but using this emotional response to deal with the facts about Snape is dangerous. So it is with us. Having emotions is of course fine, JKR *does* intend us to react emotionally to her stories. But using those emotions to discuss facts is dangerous in that it can easily lead us to false conclusions. Del From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 22 20:08:36 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 20:08:36 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120393 > Del replies: snip. So it is with us. Having emotions is of course fine, JKR *does* intend us to react emotionally to her stories. But using those emotions to discuss facts is dangerous in that it can easily lead us to false conclusions. Alla: But using emotions does not mean to me to forget the facts, it means that I refuse to turn off my emotions when I analyse the facts. From bob.oliver at cox.net Wed Dec 22 20:08:44 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 20:08:44 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120394 > Kneasy: > Unfortunately, yes; some posters seem to. > Why should anyone have the slightest interest in someone else's > emotional spasms (assuming they're genuine; not a given) about a > non-existent youth? > It would perhaps be expected from an over-wrought 14 year old > overdosing on romanticism, but real grown-ups? Hardly. Hmmm. I shall let the List Elves deal with this issue. Lupinlore From bob.oliver at cox.net Wed Dec 22 20:12:14 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 20:12:14 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120395 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: > > Del replies: > I'm in the middle ground. I can appreciate the value of emotions in > some discussions, and the value of a non-emotional approach in other > discussions. > > There are two major problems with the emotional approach. First it's > completely subjective. Everybody can and do react in a different way, > which makes any discussion almost impossible, because in the end it's > only a matter of "I think my emotions are more > justified/acceptable/whatever than yours", which of course doesn't get > us anywhere. We can't discuss each other's emotions. We can only > discuss the canon's facts. Which is why, when discussing some of the > canon's facts, it's not necessarily a good idea to bring in our emotions. > > The second major problem is that our emotions can and do interfere > with our intellect. Harry is a good example of that : he's been wrong > several times because he submitted the facts to the distorting filter > of his emotions. He's entitled not to like Snape, for example, but > when he lets that dislike colour his analysis of a situation, he > wrongfully concludes that Snape is guilty (of whatever). His emotional > response to Snape is perfectly valid, but using this emotional > response to deal with the facts about Snape is dangerous. > > So it is with us. Having emotions is of course fine, JKR *does* intend > us to react emotionally to her stories. But using those emotions to > discuss facts is dangerous in that it can easily lead us to false > conclusions. > > Del Agreed. But the beauty of it, is in the end, none of these characters are going to be hurt by our emotions, flaws, distortions, misunderstandings, or rantings. Aint fiction grand? :-) Lupinlore From nrenka at yahoo.com Wed Dec 22 20:14:25 2004 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 20:14:25 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120396 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" wrote: > Kneasy: > Unfortunately, yes; some posters seem to. > Why should anyone have the slightest interest in someone else's > emotional spasms (assuming they're genuine; not a given) about a > non-existent youth? It's a rhetorical pose, but a fairly weak one, to state that emotion doesn't figure at all in the response and analysis to literature, or to most other things, such as it goes. One can try to become aware of one's own feelings with fairly good success, but they are often the little-examined starting point for analysis--attempts to figure out 'why do I feel this way?'--which strongly color the end product. To answer the question above, because the emotional response is one method of approaching a literary work, and as a list, we do not dictate a proper method of response. The requirement that comments reference canon generates some empirical grounding instead of being purely subjective, but from there on, it's up to the individuals interested to talk about how they read this literature. You can't make people read things they're not interested in (unless you're the teacher and assigning it; but I, for one, get enough of that every day), and it's very easy to ignore things that aren't interesting. Perhaps a hybrid reading of the books might be interesting: how is Rowling-as-author trying to elicit emotional responses from readers? Partially subjective, of course, but an important component without which the books can be treated as a dry structuralist analysis. Fun to start with, rather limited (IMHO) in the long run. For instance, it's interesting to consider various emotional responses to (of course) Snape, a character where many people react very differently. Why? It's personal, yes, but it's not merely such; and to reduce Snape to a set of literary functions is not much fun, at least for me. For me (myself, and I), it's interesting to note places where an emotional reaction (which is not necessarily knee-jerk) and a more critical analysis don't line up. Ah, the frisson. -Nora finds that in analyzing music, emotional responses often lead to uncovering the analytically most interesting parts, and is now tempted to use Lewin's phenomenological language to talk about fans From elsyee_h at yahoo.com Wed Dec 22 20:20:19 2004 From: elsyee_h at yahoo.com (Tammy) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 20:20:19 -0000 Subject: Application for Head of House In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120397 >potioncat wrote: > > Now that we can no longer debate whether Snape was really a > Gryffindor, shunned by his housemates, I began to wonder about the > other teachers. After all, perhaps very soon, there may need to be > new appointments made for Head(s) of House. Heads of House are > chosen from former house members...so, who is the running for > Slytherin and Gryffindor? I hope that any openings are due to > promotions or change in careers and not to the ultimate > sacrifice...but there is a war going on. > > We know Hagrid was a Gryffindor...but with all the shenanigans that > go on in Gryffindor with McGonagall as Head, it would become a real > Animal House with Hagrid as Head! Tammy replies: Oh, most definitely not Hagrid, he's horrid as a teacher, as Head of House he'd bring down Hogwarts within a year! > potioncat: > Any other contenders? > > Trelawney would make a terrible Head...but which House was hers? > Ravenclaw? She lives in something of an ivory tower...but that's a > stereotype that doesn't really fit Ravenclaw students. She's > something of a duffer...but does that "really" describe > Hufflepuffs? She could be a Gryffindor...it took courage to be the > 13th member at the Christmas table. Or is she Slytherin? Hmmm. > Let's see, she got Dumbledore to hire her, even though he was going > to eliminate divination from the cirriculum. She has a nice safe > place to live, even though she doesn't do such a great job at her > job. When she was sacked not only did the Headmaster insist she keep > her quarters, but the Deputy Headmistress, was openly nice to her! > Cunning, don't you think? Could Sibyll Trelawney be a very > Slytherin Slytherin? Any thoughts? Tammy replies: Going through a list of the staff, here's what I came up with: Examining the current staff doesn't really leave too many options, I think... Current Staff: Binns - hey, if a ghost can be a teacher, why not head of house? Okay, so he's probably too dull, maybe he's a Hufflepuff. Prof. Grubbly-Plank - Somehow she strikes me as a Hufflepuff, or possibly a Ravenclaw. She's competent as a teacher, but I'd sooner see her getting a fulltime teaching position than head of House. Prof. Sinistra & Prof. Vector - Not often mentioned, but could come into a larger role yet I suppose. Prof. Trewlawney - personally, I see her as a Hufflepuff, but Potioncat's right, she's clever enough to be a Slytherin. She'd be hilarious as Head of House though, reading everyone's career options in their tea leaves or something, poor kids. Then of course there are the "non-teaching staff," who could possibly still be Head of House, right? Who says Head of House actually has to be a teacher, it could be one of the other staff members. Madam Pince - not really mentioned too much, I'd see her as a Ravenclaw though, being a librarian and all, or a Slytherin, since she's apparently mean. Madam Hooch - If she's brave enough to be a Quidditch Ref, she's probably a Gryffindor, I'd say. She'd be cool to see as Head of House too, would she still be an impartial referee? Madam Pomfrey - Honestly I've no clue what house Madam Pomfrey would have been in. I'd say she's probably a little too busy nursing students to actually be Head of House though. Then there are the missing professors for Muggle Studies and Ancient Runes, who could, by some outside chance, still play a role. After all, just 'cause Harry doesn't have their classes doesn't mean they're not important. I'd say it's most likely that people from outside Hogwarts would come in as Head of House/s, perhaps Lupin returning, Moody, or even Madam Maxim. Kingsley would be a lovely Head of House, but who'd want to stop being an Auror to be a teacher? -Tammy From tigerfan41 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 22 20:27:18 2004 From: tigerfan41 at yahoo.com (Darrell Harris) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 12:27:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: Release Date In-Reply-To: <1103742068.18450.92319.m20@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <20041222202718.80183.qmail@web52506.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120398 I apologize if this has been covered earlier but due to my work load I haven't had time to read posts for awhile. Has anyone else gotten a Barnes and Noble July 16 2005 release notification for Half-Blood Prince? __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today! http://my.yahoo.com From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Wed Dec 22 20:30:30 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 20:30:30 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120399 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lupinlore" wrote: > > Yes, we do see these things differently. And it is not, in our view, > either ill-mannered or unnecessary, or we would not do it. I am > truly sorry you find it offensive, but then all I can do is suggest > that you avoid such conversations. Perhaps we do have different > modes of public discourse than were common some years ago. Once > again, if that makes you uncomfortable, I'm sorry, but we aren't > going to stop, and the best I can say is that if it upsets you that > terribly you would be well advised to avoid it. > Your expression of consideration is appreciated. No, I don't generally find public displays of emotion offensive so much as somewhat excessive and sometimes inappropriate. Yes, I was brought up to don the stiff-upper lip; unfashionable now, but not without its virtues and benefits. I was one of the millions appalled by the emotional overdosing at the death of Princess Diana. It seemed designed to attract attention to those mourning rather than showing respect for the dead. Grieving is done in private. You cry alone or with family - not as a public spectacle. Old-fashioned values again. And yes, I do realise that this is not the way many react now. Real emotions are expressed more openly these days. However, I'm still unable to transfer real grief, concern, emotion onto unreal people. Sorry, I just can't do it, nor comprehend how someone else can. Every time a poster gets emotionally fraught over the way Harry's treated I feel that they've missed the important point - he ain't real. It never happened. Snape has never actually been sarcastic; the Dursleys have never locked someone named Harry Potter under the stairs - it's make-believe. One might as well burst into tears at the death of Tinkerbell. OK if you're 7, but not once you pass the age of consent. It doesn't match my definition of adult perspectives. Maybe I'm out of step. Quite possible. But I'm unlikely to change at this late stage. Just list me as an irredeemable oldie. Kneasy From jwh at comp.leeds.ac.uk Wed Dec 22 16:25:16 2004 From: jwh at comp.leeds.ac.uk (jaymzhuk) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 16:25:16 -0000 Subject: Ginny's full name. Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120400 Perhaps it's fallen off the bottom of the search, but I noticed on looking at JK Rowling's website that Ginny's full name is Ginevra, but nobody seems to have commented on this! A quick Google for "Ginevra" brought up Leonardo da Vinci's painting "Ginevra de Benci", which in turn leads (almost) to the Italian for Juniper. SO, knowing Jo's penchant for meaningful names, anyone dug anything out? Websites seem to suggest that Juniper berries are a diuretic, possibly good for counteracting poisons, and certainly good at repelling insects (Skeeter?) Perhaps interesting, one variety is "Juniper virginiana": "The interior wood is of a reddish colour and highly valued on account of its great durability, being suitable for exposure to all weather. The highly-coloured and fragrant heartwood is largely used in the manufacture of the wood coverings of blacklead pencils, and also for pails, tubs, and various household utensils subjected to wettings. Boxes made of the wood are useful for the preservation of woollens and furs, it being an excellent insectifuge on account of the oil contained in it." (http://www.botanical.com/botanical/mgmh/j/junipe11.html) Reddish colour ties in the Weasley's, durability, ... ? Perhaps a bit too tenuous. :) Apologies if this has been done to death and been buried already. From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Wed Dec 22 20:35:00 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 20:35:00 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120401 Lupinlore wrote: "I will agree with you that I am seeing everything through the filter of my own experiences. I can't see things any other way, and I'd be foolish to deny it. Whether it's erroneous or not is for future experience to dictate. And as for being justified -- well, it's natural and inevitable. If you find it offensive, I am sorry that your feelings are wounded." Del replies: I personally don't find it offensive. Just cumbersome in some cases. Both my and your feelings and past experiences can become annoying when we try to discuss some things. For example, we've almost all had teachers more or less Snape-like. Whether we liked them, disliked them, feared them, or hated them, this past experience is *bound* to make us react emotionally to Snape's teaching methods. But those emotions become a burden when trying to assess whether Snape's methods are working *on his students*. Saying "I know from experience that such methods can't work", or "most children don't react well to that kind of methods" is, well, irrelevant. Saying "Neville goes to pieces in every single Potions lesson", on the other hand, is relevant, because it is a given fact. Extrapolating on why Neville goes to pieces, though, is once again a risky matter, because we will automatically assume that he crumbles because of the same reasons *we* would crumble, which isn't necessarily true (up to the end of OoP, for example, one could have argued that Neville is terrible in Potions class because he is morbidly afraid of potions and/or cauldrons, for whatever reason). And then again, we still have to define what successful teaching is *in the WW*. If Neville obtains a good result at his Potions OWL, can we objectively say that Snape's teaching method wasn't appropriate for Neville for example, since the end result seems to be the only thing that matters? Emotions aren't bad. But they sure can muddle some discussions *unnecessarily*. Kneasy wrote: " And you have no monopoly on experiences. I've watched children die; held their hands while they did so, too. That makes a vast difference; to me, fiction is nothing like the real thing and never can be. I cannot behave or pretend to behave as if it were. Equating *my* past experiences with a character in a light novel would be to debase and devalue real people and real tragedy. " Lupinlore answered: "I respect you for your experience. But you seem to think it gives your method of approaching the text some superior weight. It does not." Del replies: I don't think that was the point Kneasy was trying to make. I think he was trying to explain that in his idea, "personal experience" and "discussing a fantasy book" have little to do in common, because one is real and the other is fictional. You Lupinlore react to Harry and his adventures as to real people, while Kneasy would consider it an insult to the real people of his life who suffered to grant Harry and the other fictional characters the statute of living, breathing, suffering human beings. His past experience *cannot* apply, because in a way, Harry and the others are not "worthy" of it. They do NOT suffer, and Kneasy is not going to pretend that they do. Apologies to Kneasy because I'm bound to have (only slightly I hope) misrepresented him. However, the approach I presented, even if it is not Kneasy's, is still valid. Lupinlore wrote: " Nor does any other kind of experience that I or anyone else might have had provide *superior* insight." Del replies: Well, sometimes it *does* feel like this on this forum... Lupinlore wrote: " However, our experience does have the weight of being *our* experience, and therefore provides the basis for our honest answers to the challenges the text brings to us." Del replies: Not necessarily. Some people (like you Lupinlore apparently) cannot do without their past experience. There's nothing wrong with that. However, you have to be aware that some people CAN do without bringing in their past experience. Lupinlore wrote: "I am truly sorry you find it offensive, but then all I can do is suggest that you avoid such conversations. Perhaps we do have different modes of public discourse than were common some years ago. Once again, if that makes you uncomfortable, I'm sorry, but we aren't going to stop, and the best I can say is that if it upsets you that terribly you would be well advised to avoid it. " Del replies: Hum, I hate to say that, but usually those things come to us without us asking for them. When Eloise Herisson tried to discuss Snape as a plot device, her thread immediately became invaded by emotional responses to Snape that were totally irrelevant to the matter. Similarly, it's not really a surprise if way too many threads, no matter how they started originally, end up discussing either Snape's nastiness or the Dursleys' abuse of Harry : that's emotional highjacking, that's what it is :-) Del From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Wed Dec 22 20:37:00 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 20:37:00 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120402 Alla wrote: "But using emotions does not mean to me to forget the facts, it means that I refuse to turn off my emotions when I analyse the facts." Del replies: I understand. But you must be careful, because emotion and reason don't work well together. Sense and sensitivity, you know :-) ? Del From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Wed Dec 22 20:39:05 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 20:39:05 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120403 Kneasy wrote: "Yes, I was brought up to don the stiff-upper lip; unfashionable now, but not without its virtues and benefits." Del replies: Unfashionable? Not in the WW, interestingly... Del From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Wed Dec 22 20:41:45 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 20:41:45 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120404 Lupinlore wrote: " But the beauty of it, is in the end, none of these characters are going to be hurt by our emotions, flaws, distortions, misunderstandings, or rantings." Del replies: They won't. But very real posters on this board can get hurt. Which begs the question : should we care more for Harry's or for our fellow posters' feelings? Del From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Wed Dec 22 20:46:48 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 20:46:48 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120405 Nora wrote: " To answer the question above, because the emotional response is one method of approaching a literary work, and as a list, we do not dictate a proper method of response." Del replies: *One* method indeed, not the only one. Nora wrote: " For me (myself, and I), it's interesting to note places where an emotional reaction (which is not necessarily knee-jerk) and a more critical analysis don't line up. Ah, the frisson." Del replies: Agreed. But that presupposes that the critical analysis is being done. Nora signed: "Nora finds that in analyzing music, emotional responses often lead to uncovering the analytically most interesting parts, and is now tempted to use Lewin's phenomenological language to talk about fans" Del replies: Sure, but you'll have to explain all the big words first ;-) Del From a_b_desert_king at hotmail.com Wed Dec 22 20:47:39 2004 From: a_b_desert_king at hotmail.com (a_b_desert_king) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 20:47:39 -0000 Subject: Is Jo a member? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120406 I personally have suspected that Jo has been lurking since at least June of this year. I read a post sometime around then that sounded too suspicious - almost as if the author (who wrote with a pseudonym but I'm afraid my memory does not serve me in retreiving it) knew something the rest of us didn't. At that time I did a profile search on the Yahoo name and there was no information given except that the person was a female (no huge surprise there - most of us have very sketchy info on our profiles). Oh how I wish I could remember the name! Or even the thread she responded to...! Anyone else think back to then? Heather From spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com Wed Dec 22 20:55:33 2004 From: spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com (dungrollin) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 20:55:33 -0000 Subject: Ginny's full name. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120407 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jaymzhuk" wrote: > > > Perhaps it's fallen off the bottom of the search, but I noticed on > looking at JK Rowling's website that Ginny's full name is > Ginevra, but nobody seems to have commented on this! > > A quick Google for "Ginevra" brought up Leonardo da Vinci's painting > "Ginevra de Benci", which in turn leads (almost) to the Italian for > Juniper. > > SO, knowing Jo's penchant for meaningful names, anyone dug anything > out? Websites seem to suggest that Juniper berries are a diuretic, > possibly good for counteracting poisons, and certainly good at > repelling insects (Skeeter?) > > Perhaps interesting, one variety is "Juniper virginiana": > > "The interior wood is of a reddish colour and highly valued on account > of its great durability, being suitable for exposure to all weather. > The highly-coloured and fragrant heartwood is largely used in the > manufacture of the wood coverings of blacklead pencils, and also for > pails, tubs, and various household utensils subjected to wettings. > Boxes made of the wood are useful for the preservation of woollens and > furs, it being an excellent insectifuge on account of the oil > contained in it." > (http://www.botanical.com/botanical/mgmh/j/junipe11.html) > > Reddish colour ties in the Weasley's, durability, ... ? > > Perhaps a bit too tenuous. :) > > Apologies if this has been done to death and been buried already. Hmmm... I just did a search too, and found that it's an Italian/German/somethingelse form of Guinevere, which is an Old French form of the Welsh name Gwenhwyfar, from gwen meaning "fair, white" and hwyfar meaning "smooth". Though apparently in Italian Ginevra means "woman of the people". I'm not well-up on Arthurian legend, but quoting from a site: "Guinevere is the beautiful wife of King Arthur. Her betrayal of her husband with Mordred prompted the battle of Camlann, which led to the deaths of both Mordred and Arthur. Later versions of the legends tell of her adulterous affair with Sir Lancelot." Which obviously doesn't bode well... I'm afraid that Juniper only makes me think of gin. (Which is a thought I'm about to act upon, given the other posts on the board at the moment...) Dungrollin No, I tell a lie, Juniper also makes me think of The Life of Brian. From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Dec 22 21:02:38 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 21:02:38 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120408 My, my, this has certainly turned interesting! I must be one of those weird people whom others would probably label a "fence-sitter" or "wishy-washy," because I've never felt compelled to make a choice between the two "camps" being put forth here as choices for HPfGU. I don't find different styles distressing. Do I ever roll my eyes at a post? Sure. Do others roll their eyes at mine? Sure. Who cares! I still enjoy far more threads here than I don't enjoy. Some people are analytical by nature, some are not. Some are interested in lit crit, others in social crit. Some respond either emotionally or *to* the emotional situations presented in the books, while others are more detached. This is not surprising! Many people are drawn to the sciences or the social sciences or the humanities. Some of us are drawn to the liberal arts because we can't decide which subjects or styles we like best and rather enjoy a mishmash. This is me for sure. I find myself nodding along with Lupinlore fairly frequently. But you know what? I nod along with Kneasy or Carolyn too sometimes. I nod along with Nora many times, with Alla or Potioncat sometimes, with Jen almost always. So what? If there are others who find that they DON'T nod along with a poster or a style or a type of thread, just delete/ignore. Now, for me, I find Kneasy's comment that he could never transfer real grief or emotion to fictional characters fascinating. That statement provides an insight which helps make additional sense of some of his musings and positions. Yet I also find it interesting when a poster identifies emotionally with a bully or the bullied. Personally, I do tend to identify with characters -- with *multiple* characters! -- so I enjoy discussions of Sirius' character flaws & strengths, of Tom's & Harry's similar upbringings, of free will & choice as they pertain to Harry & DD's role in his life, of what it's like for Ron et al. to be poor. I also enjoy the theorizing about the whys and wherefores: What's up with Lucius ? is he loyal to Voldy or power hungry himself? Is there something going on in Vernon or Petunia's background which would explain much of their behavior? Why *did* Snape come back? All that is fun to me. Where we get into trouble, imo, is when someone issues a blanket value judgment over another "camp." I *do* understand that approaching things primarily from one style or another, rather than from someplace in the middle, can be frustrating. You're trying to make a point and the other person keeps coming back with Value Judgment A or Analysis B. They're not *hearing* each other or seeing through the same lens. I acknowledge that can be frustrating. But you know what? Then maybe try once more, then bow out of the discussion. What I object to is those who either expect or "require" all others to SEE it their way or DO it their way. Or when a poster is openly condescending towards another or arrogant about his/her position being right [whether that's a *single* position on a *single event/character or about his/her overall way of analyzing things]. There's room here for the variety we offer. Or so I think. Siriusly Snapey Susan From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Wed Dec 22 21:15:34 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 21:15:34 -0000 Subject: Ginny's full name. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120409 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dungrollin" wrote: > snip> > I'm afraid that Juniper only makes me think of gin. (Which is a > thought I'm about to act upon, given the other posts on the board at > the moment...) > > Dungrollin > No, I tell a lie, Juniper also makes me think of The Life of Brian. Hmm. Well, Genever is Dutch Gin, as I mentioned the last time this came up. Arthur has a lost weekend in Amsterdam, absolutely fascinated by Muggle er, appliances, the local fire-water and it's effects. Ginny is named in honour of the event. Probably not true, but who cares? Be creative; invent a scandalous rumour. Kneasy From barbara_mbowen at yahoo.com Wed Dec 22 21:34:48 2004 From: barbara_mbowen at yahoo.com (barbara_mbowen) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 21:34:48 -0000 Subject: Aunt Petunia (was Re: Theoretical boundaries) In-Reply-To: <200412221330197.SM01224@devbox> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120410 Marmelade Mom snipping away: > > imamommy wrote: > > > Aunt Petunia's behavior ..... could she be a witch who > > > *refused* to learn magic? > > > > > > (snip quote from the World Book Day Chat) > > > > > > According to this, Petunia is a muggle, but is it possible that she > > > *chose* to be a muggle? Could she have been born into a > > > part-wizarding family and decided not to go to Hogwarts? > > What is the > > > "more" to her? > > > > > > Ms. Luna here: > > > > I find this theory very interesting. It would explain why > > the Dursleys are trying so hard to be perceived as "normal", > > why their house is so abnormally clean, why their son is so > > abnormally spoiled...Petunia is seriously overcompensating > > for being a witch! It would also explain their > > overindulgence of Duddums...they/she wants to keep him calm > > so, if he were magical, magic would not accidently seep out > > if he were upset. > > This puts a new and more interesting twist on the Dursleys. I truly > > hope you are correct in this imamommy....I love it when story > > lines spin > > in new directions. > > Vivamus: > I, too, like this. In addition to what you have said here, it also puts a > more believable basis on her knowledge of the dementors and Azkaban. Given > her almost hysterical effort to suppress, repress and ignore any connection > with the magical world, the thought that she would even retain that bit of > information for all those years suggests she had a much deeper connection > with the WW than might first appear. Add to this JKR's assertion on her website that DD and Aunt Petunia had had correspondence *before* baby Harry was dropped on her door. I can think of only two possibilities: that DD wrote to a reluctant witch Petunia to encourage her to join the WW, or that DD wrote to her to explain why a bunch of bad wizards killed her (and Lily's ) parents. Both could have happened. And someone on this list once theorized that Petunia goes around whispering cleaning charms like "scourgify!" whenever Dudley and Vernon aren't looking..... I like Petunia as a reluctant witch very much! Marmelade's mom > From poppytheelf at hotmail.com Wed Dec 22 21:50:40 2004 From: poppytheelf at hotmail.com (Phyllis) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 21:50:40 -0000 Subject: ADMIN: Rudeness and Insults Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120411 Greetings from Hexquarters! A reminder from the HPfGU List Rules: "We welcome debate, but do not attack or insult other list members." Interpretations and opinions of canon are as varied as our membership; debating and discussing these interpretations and sharing opinions are the reasons for this group's existence. As adults, we expect everyone here to accept that we are all entitled to our opinions, and we expect that people should be able to disagree with one another without being snide or insulting. Please keep your comments and critiques focused to the merits of the argument. Do not attack or insult other list members. If you find yourself losing your temper, don't hit 'Send'. Read your response later and find a way to make your point without attacking others. Please keep it civil. We reserve the right to pull offending threads and to put repeat offenders back on moderated status. Thank you for your cooperation, Poppy Elf for the HPfGU List Administration Team From R.Vink2 at chello.nl Wed Dec 22 21:58:28 2004 From: R.Vink2 at chello.nl (Renee) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 21:58:28 -0000 Subject: One last try (re: Parenting Harry ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120412 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > > Renee: > Basically, yes. When discussing the technical side of storytelling - > how the effects are brought about, how the elements of the story are > put together, etc., I find that having strong opinions about the > characters tends to obscure my views of how they function in the > story. Snape the character is allowed to push my buttons, but if I > want to talk about Snape the plot device, Snape the metaphor, Snape > the archetype, or whatever, I try to take a step back and be as > objective as possible. Actually, when approached at this level, > Snape isn't a character anymore but an object of study. > > > Alla: > > Thank you, I finally got it. :o) So, on this level no value judgments > about the character can be made, right? Only how well he fits in the > plot and what is his function storyline-wise, correct? Renee: Yes, from my point of view, though I'd say "no moral judgments". At least, that's how I see it. :) From imamommy at sbcglobal.net Wed Dec 22 22:04:26 2004 From: imamommy at sbcglobal.net (imamommy at sbcglobal.net) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 22:04:26 -0000 Subject: Aunt Petunia (was Re: Theoretical boundaries) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120413 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "barbara_mbowen" wrote: > > Marmelade Mom snipping away: > > > imamommy wrote: > > > > Aunt Petunia's behavior ..... could she be a witch who > > > > *refused* to learn magic? > > > > > > > > (snip quote from the World Book Day Chat) > > > > > > > > According to this, Petunia is a muggle, but is it possible that she > > > > *chose* to be a muggle? Could she have been born into a > > > > part-wizarding family and decided not to go to Hogwarts? > > > What is the > > > > "more" to her? > > > > > > > > > Ms. Luna here: > > > > > > I find this theory very interesting. It would explain why > > > the Dursleys are trying so hard to be perceived as "normal", > > > why their house is so abnormally clean, why their son is so > > > abnormally spoiled...Petunia is seriously overcompensating > > > for being a witch! It would also explain their > > > overindulgence of Duddums...they/she wants to keep him calm > > > so, if he were magical, magic would not accidently seep out > > > if he were upset. > > > This puts a new and more interesting twist on the Dursleys. I truly > > > hope you are correct in this imamommy....I love it when story > > > lines spin > > > in new directions. > > > > Vivamus: > > I, too, like this. In addition to what you have said here, it also puts a > > more believable basis on her knowledge of the dementors and Azkaban. > Given > > her almost hysterical effort to suppress, repress and ignore any connection > > with the magical world, the thought that she would even retain that bit of > > information for all those years suggests she had a much deeper connection > > with the WW than might first appear. > > Add to this JKR's assertion on her website that DD and Aunt Petunia had had > correspondence *before* baby Harry was dropped on her door. I can think of > only two possibilities: that DD wrote to a reluctant witch Petunia to encourage > her to join the WW, or that DD wrote to her to explain why a bunch of bad > wizards killed her (and Lily's ) parents. Both could have happened. And > someone on this list once theorized that Petunia goes around whispering > cleaning charms like "scourgify!" whenever Dudley and Vernon aren't > looking..... > > I like Petunia as a reluctant witch very much! > > Marmelade's mom imamommy (who's pleased to have a theory you all like!): Inactive Witch!Petunia could have simply refused to go to Hogwarts, but I like the idea that she actually went, and had a bad experience so she left the school. Maybe some of you who are gifted with fanfic could write the story of Petunia's year at Hogwarts :) > > > From moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 22 22:33:39 2004 From: moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com (K G) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 14:33:39 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Is Jo a member? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041222223339.84043.qmail@web53508.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120414 snow15145 wrote: Jo has updated her site again and it looks to me that `she' has been snooping in our forum: Rumors section?the first question?last sentence "?I greatly enjoyed the facetious speculation about the corned beef- loving otters from Bristol, though." Sounds a lot like what moonmyyst had said in message 120257 Monday night: "(who still thinks the HBP in an otter that lives in Bristol and who eats corned beef)" Jo was watching the forums Monday night: News section "?(and I do hope you consider it a decent birthday present, Delleve- who-posts-at-the-Leaky-Cauldron... not that I was watching the fansites on Monday night or anything...)" Snow SEE!!! When I sent out the post a couple of weeks ago about what question would you ask JKR if you had a chance, maybe she was watching and maybe, just maybe, she will answer one or two. We are going to have to be on our best literary behavior!!! moonmyyst __________________________________________________ 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 R.Vink2 at chello.nl Wed Dec 22 22:51:32 2004 From: R.Vink2 at chello.nl (Renee) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 22:51:32 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120415 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: > > Alla wrote: > "But using emotions does not mean to me to forget the facts, it means > that I refuse to turn off my emotions when I analyse the facts." > > Del replies: > I understand. But you must be careful, because emotion and reason > don't work well together. Sense and sensitivity, you know :-) ? > Renee: But is it possible to turn off your emotions when discussing the characters and their actions? (Are there any Mr. Spocks on this list?) And contrary to popular opinion, reason and emotion can go together; people who are devoid of emotions often aren't the best decision-makers, so why would they make the best critics? Speaking for myself, I can't enjoy a story if I don't respond emotionally to at least some of the characters, and if I analyse them as characters (as opposed to analysing them as plot elements etc.), it's impossible for me to ban these emotions entirely, even if I'd want to. But IMO, this isn't where the main problem arises. The problem arises when I allow my emotions to produce moral judgments which I then consider valid because they're based on my oh so sincere feelings. And looking at this list, my general impression is that discussions usually don't turn into arguments until the judgments come marching in. That's when I'm inclined to side with the people who say: this is fiction, these characters aren't real. We can like them or dislike them or anything in between, but are we called to judge them? Or are we? Do these books try to provoke the readers into being judgmental? Sometimes I wonder. Renee From sroginson at sbcglobal.net Wed Dec 22 16:26:51 2004 From: sroginson at sbcglobal.net (stephen roginson) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 08:26:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Aunt Petunia (was Re: Theoretical boundaries) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041222162651.29507.qmail@web81503.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120416 imamommy wrote: > Aunt Petunia's behavior ..... could she be a witch who > *refused* to learn magic? > > (snip quote from the World Book Day Chat) > > According to this, Petunia is a muggle, but is it possible that > she *chose* to be a muggle? Could she have been born into a > part-wizarding family and decided not to go to Hogwarts? What > is the "more" to her? Ms. Luna here: I find this theory very interesting. It would explain why the Dursleys are trying so hard to be perceived as "normal", why their house is so abnormally clean, why their son is so abnormally spoiled...Petunia is seriously overcompensating for being a witch! It would also explain their overindulgence of Duddums...they/she wants to keep him calm so, if he were magical, magic would not accidently seep out if he were upset. This puts a new and more interesting twist on the Dursleys. I truly hope you are correct in this imamommy....I love it when story lines spin in new directions. I've been intrigued by this thread about Aunt Petuna. (this is my first post) I wonder if Petuna made some agreement with DD regarding Dudley...i.e: she would take Harry in if Dudley is kept off of the Hogwarts list, or some variation. Even funnier thought: Petuna is a witch. Dudley could be the HBP... although JKR already mentioned that there isn't much Dursley Family in this one. --Stephen From saraandra at saraandra.plus.com Wed Dec 22 23:15:02 2004 From: saraandra at saraandra.plus.com (amanitamuscaria1) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 23:15:02 -0000 Subject: Is Jo a member? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120417 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "a_b_desert_king" wrote: > > I personally have suspected that Jo has been lurking since at least > June of this year. I read a post sometime around then that sounded > too suspicious - almost as if the author (who wrote with a pseudonym > but I'm afraid my memory does not serve me in retreiving it) knew > something the rest of us didn't. > > At that time I did a profile search on the Yahoo name and there was > no information given except that the person was a female (no huge > surprise there - most of us have very sketchy info on our profiles). > > Oh how I wish I could remember the name! Or even the thread she > responded to...! Anyone else think back to then? > > Heather AmanitaMuscaria now - mooseming. I'm sure it was mooseming, about the time you said - I searched for anything before the series of posts, and there wasn't anything, but I think after, there was something that didn't sound right? I think it was around the time you noticed. Cheers. AmanitaMuscaria From bethanycurrie at aol.com Wed Dec 22 21:35:45 2004 From: bethanycurrie at aol.com (curriebethany) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 21:35:45 -0000 Subject: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 34, "The Department of Mysteries" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120418 > 4) When riding the Thestrals to the Ministry of Magic, could the riders be > seen? Can only people who see thestrals normally be able to see the riders > during flight? I think maybe Thestrals' riders are invisible. Thestrals may be like Fred's and George's Headless Hats, which extend the invisibility charm beyond the hats and over the head of the wearer. Remember the hat isn't invisible until the person puts it on. Likewise, people who can see Thestrals normally may not be able to see one when someone is riding it. I'm not sure why Thestrals would make their riders invisible, so this theory may not work, but it's an interesting thought anyway. > > 12) Why is Hermione not affected by the veil like Harry and the others? > She is almost hysterical when trying to pry Harry away from the veil. What > does she know or understand differently? > Assuming the spirits of those who have died from the AK curse are behind (in?) the veil, I think Harry, Luna and Neville are attracted to it because someone on the other side (inside?) is calling to them specifically. Harry's parents are both there, Sirius is (now) there, so obviously Harry would be drawn to it. Neville saw his grandfather die - I wonder if it's related at all to the torture of his parents. If so, he might have died from the AK curse as well. Luna? Well, we don't know who she saw die, so I can't exactly theorize why she is drawn to the veil. I just don't think we can assume those who can see Thestrals are all attracted to the veil and vice versa. As for Hermione, I think she sees the fact the veil shouldn't be moving (yet is) and the drawing power the veil has over Harry, Neville and Luna. I don't think she knows or understands anything differently, but maybe she remembered Mr. Weasley's advice to "never trust anything if you can't see where it keeps its brains." --Bethany From klevasseur at earthlink.net Wed Dec 22 21:56:03 2004 From: klevasseur at earthlink.net (ms_luna_knows) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 21:56:03 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries / Dursleys' abuse In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120419 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: > > Ms. Luna wrote: > "We have to remember that the main character in the series is changing > and with that his perceptions change. The first few books are seen > through the eyes of a child the next few the child is becoming a > teenager and with that he is seeing things through a teenager's eyes. > And the perception of a teenager IS darker..." > > Del replies: > I disagree, in that the books are not seen through Harry's eyes, but > through the narrator's eyes, who is NOT Harry. > > For example, in PS/SS, the narrator presents most of the abuse Harry > is going through as *funny*, something that Harry would definitely not > do! Harry might not be aware he's being abused, but there's no way he > can find his childhood amusing. Ms. luna, WHo said his childhood was amusing? Harry was obviously not happy with his situation, but he also did not know much outside of Privet Drive. He was told all of his life he was less than everyone else in the house, and he didn't really find out different until he was outside that house, made friends of his own, before he realized that he was more than he was being lead to believe. > >> Ms. Luna wrote: > " Harry is also learning through his new experiences outside of the > Dursley home that the treatment he received at the Dursleys' was abusive." > > Del replies: > *Harry* is learning that, but the *narrator* knew it all along. Proof > is : he picked out the abusive episodes in Harry's childhood, > something Harry himself would probably have been quite unable to do, > if as you suggest he was barely aware he was being abused. >> Ms. Luna wrote: > "Again, through Harry's eyes....as he grows and changes and learns, > things do become more serious and tragic..." > > Del replies: > Harry is changing and that's normal. What highly disconcerting for me, > though, is that the *narrator* is changing as well. The narrator of > OoP is not the same narrator that told us the story of PS/SS. He > changed in the meantime, became more involved with Harry. He now > identifies much more strongly with Harry than he did back in the first > books. IMO only of course. > > Ms. Luna wrote: > "teenagers ARE emotionally charged and are hard to read" > > Del replies: > Abuse is emotionally charged and should be hard to read. And yet in > the first books, the Dursley abuse was singularly non-emotionally > charged and very easy and funny to read. > > It's not the subject : it's the way it's presented. It's not Harry, > it's the narrator. Ms. Luna: Okay, I take your point about not directly from Harry's eyes do we see everything, but most of Harry's own story is from Harry's perspective. The background of the story, his history with the Dursley's and other back story is definately not Harry, but from Harry's POV we know his feelings about different experiences, we know what Harry is thinking, his confusion, anger, frustration, the conversations he has, the misunderstandings, his dreams, the secrets he keeps,....etc. So, yes, there is a narrator telling the story, but it IS from Harry's perspective, and as Harry grows and changes, so to must the style of narration. From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Wed Dec 22 23:26:23 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 23:26:23 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120420 Renee wrote: "And contrary to popular opinion, reason and emotion can go together; people who are devoid of emotions often aren't the best decision-makers, so why would they make the best critics?" Del replies: Making a decision and discussing possibilities are two very different things. Renee wrote: "Speaking for myself, I can't enjoy a story if I don't respond emotionally to at least some of the characters, and if I analyse them as characters (as opposed to analysing them as plot elements etc.), it's impossible for me to ban these emotions entirely, even if I'd want to. " Del replies: You can't ban them entirely. Some people can't ban them at all. Other people can ban completely. Yet other people can deliberately choose how much they ban them depending on the circumstances, their mood, or whatever. And nobody's wrong. I snipped the part where you explain where you think the problem comes from, simply because I completely agree with it. Renee wrote: "Or are we? Do these books try to provoke the readers into being judgmental? Sometimes I wonder." Del replies: Good question. Sometimes JKR seems to *want* us to be judgmental, and yet at other times she clearly demonstrates that Harry or some other character (and us through them) shouldn't be so judgmental. Puzzling. Del From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Wed Dec 22 23:35:55 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 23:35:55 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries / Dursleys' abuse In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120421 Ms. luna wrote: "WHo said his childhood was amusing?" Del replies: The narrator. Re-read PS/SS : the description of Harry's life at the Dursleys is very often *hilarious*. I remember thinking that I hadn't laughed so hard in a long time when I first read the first chapters of PS/SS. Ms. Luna wrote: "Okay, I take your point about not directly from Harry's eyes do we see everything, but most of Harry's own story is from Harry's perspective." Del replies: The story is told from his perspective, yes, but not *by* him. The narrator is like some kind of ghost living right inside Harry and telling his story, but he is not Harry. Ms. Luna wrote: "So, yes, there is a narrator telling the story, but it IS from Harry's perspective, and as Harry grows and changes, so to must the style of narration." Del replies: Why? The style of narration is the narrator's only, it doesn't *have* to be influenced by the story he is relating at all. Usually, an invisible narrator like the one in HP remains strictly consistent from the beginning to the end of a book or series, no matter what happens. Del From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 22 23:43:51 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 23:43:51 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries / Dursleys' abuse In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120422 Del replies: Why? The style of narration is the narrator's only, it doesn't *have* to be influenced by the story he is relating at all. Usually, an invisible narrator like the one in HP remains strictly consistent from the beginning to the end of a book or series, no matter what happens. Alla: I disagree. I believe Carol recently (or relatively recently) gave very good description of the narrator in the books. I don't remember the correct name for such narrator, but such narrator is not ever completely objective. I think it is called limited third view narrator, but I am not sure. The events are narrated not from Harry POV, BUT for the most part narrator only sees events from Harry POV and identifies with him only. If Carol reads it, maybe she will explain it better or corrects me. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 22 23:48:12 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 23:48:12 -0000 Subject: So, children series or not? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120423 I went to preorder the book to bn.com and on the advertisement page it still says age range 9-12. Do you think it somehow supports the idea that JKR orients the books towards the younger audience? Do you think it is only publishers opinion? Alla From kewpiebb99 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 22 23:59:02 2004 From: kewpiebb99 at yahoo.com (dkewpie) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 15:59:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Is Jo a member? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041222235902.34738.qmail@web40509.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120424 --- amanitamuscaria1 wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "a_b_desert_king" > wrote: > > Oh how I wish I could remember the name! Or even the thread she > > responded to...! Anyone else think back to then > > AmanitaMuscaria now - mooseming. I'm sure it was mooseming, about the > time you said - I searched for anything before the series of posts, > and there wasn't anything, but I think after, there was something > that didn't sound right? I think it was around the time you noticed. > Cheers. AmanitaMuscaria That's so interesting because I had the exactly same thought on mind! I'm glad that I'm not the only one notice Mooseming. For some reason couple of her posts made me think "that sound like the author is talking..." I even saved down all her posts at that time, because they're such interesting posts regardless she's Jo or not. k. From doliesl at yahoo.com Thu Dec 23 00:01:38 2004 From: doliesl at yahoo.com (Dolies) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 16:01:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Is Jo a member? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041223000138.60238.qmail@web13724.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120425 Heather wrote: > > I personally have suspected that Jo has been lurking since at least > > June of this year. I read a post sometime around then that sounded > > too suspicious - almost as if the author (who wrote with a > pseudonym > > but I'm afraid my memory does not serve me in retreiving it) knew > > something the rest of us didn't. > > Oh how I wish I could remember the name! Or even the thread she > > responded to...! Anyone else think back to then? > AmanitaMuscaria now - mooseming. I'm sure it was mooseming, about the > time you said - I searched for anything before the series of posts, > and there wasn't anything, but I think after, there was something > that didn't sound right? I think it was around the time you noticed. D nod her head: So I'm not the only one who thought 'mooseming' (signed name - Jo) sounded suspicious *chuckled*. He/She appeared at the height of one of those regular Snape-bashing/loving session. But I highly doubt that's the same 'Jo' ;p...come on... Regardless who 'Jo' is, I took notice because her/his post is vastly different from everybody that they just simply...stood out. There's always a light humorous tone. Unfortunately her posts were mostly ignored and she seemed to have no longer active. I remember enjoying her post a lot and here're some messages number: 100769, 101015, 100572, 100990, 100782, 100776, 100960, 100974 to name a few. D. (I hope it'd be a compliment to Jo. that some of us thought her as THE Jo.?) ;) From moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 23 00:11:29 2004 From: moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com (moonmyyst13) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 00:11:29 -0000 Subject: Is this the post that we think was from JKR? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120426 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mooseming" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" > wrote: > > Snip > > > > No, I don't think we need to go outside Hogwarts quite yet. Save that > > for Book 7. > > > > Carol, > > > > IMO (should be H but I'm still working on that!), the final showdown > has to be at Hogwarts. > > I find this very hard to justify because it simply feels right. In no > particular order here are my 'reasons': > > It is the spiritual home for the main protagonist, antagonist and for > DD (the narrator). > > It is the safe home for all members of the magical community: giants, > centaurs, elves, werewolves, spiders (yeuk), ghosts, half breeds, > squibs, Malfoy, Snape and Trelawny! > > It is the historical home for the WW split and where that split is > still acted out in the form of houses. > > It is the shared home of absolutely all the main characters including > the dead ones. > > There are still areas to be explored and explained, in particular the > chamber, the forest, the ghosts (and now the graveyard possibly). > > This is a coming of age story, traditionally this is marked by a > symbolic change of state e.g. getting married, becoming a king, dying > (don't panic), and in this case graduating (I think). > > Most compelling for me however is that it is the place where the books > and the story truly come alive, Hogwarts is the single most > charismatic 'character' in the books, it lives, has secrets both good > and bad, has a past and internal conflict. To me Hogwarts 'is' JKR, it > shares her sense of humour and generous nature. > > Regards > Jo > > (coo that came from the heart!) Notice how it is signed?? moonmyyst From moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 23 00:16:48 2004 From: moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com (moonmyyst13) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 00:16:48 -0000 Subject: Here is another from mooseming In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120427 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mooseming" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "samnanya" wrote: > > Thank you for setting me straight on that count. The reason > > that I was pissy and rude was that the original response to > > the argument (which I should have quoted but did not) was > > ------------------------------ > > Reread the following pages: > > *OotP, Page 856 (US) > > *PS, Page 299 (US) > > > > Harry has cried tears before. > > {name} > > ------------------------------ > > > > If you read those references there was no mention at all of > > Harry actually shedding tears. > > Your reference in PoA (p 178 UK, 240 US) is much clearer, > > harder, if not impossible, to refute, and would NEVER have > > elicited my rude response. I have no problem with logical > > arguments and am the first to apologise when I am wrong. > > > Snip > > > I also found it interesting that, in the scene you referred > > to, Harry had passed out twice. > > > > After the first time (PoA 177) > > "'Harry!' > > Harry jerked back to life.... sitting up and > > feeling cold sweat trickling down behind his glasses." > > > > After the second time (PoA 178 as you quoted) > > "'Harry!Harry... wake up...' > > Lupin was tapping Harry hard on the face.....Harry > > suddenly realized that there were tears on his face > > mingling with the sweat." > > > > I wonder why Lupin used that method to revive Harry as > > opposed to shaking his shoulders. Would you wake a sleeping > > person by poking their face? Just a thought..... > > > > > > Jo here > > I really like Samnanya's theory and hadn't thought about this > particular aspect before. > > It is difficult because 'close' reading can become 'hair splitting' > reading and provides an excellent opportunity to turn 'active' reading > into fan fiction! > > However, that won't stop me putting in my twopenny worth! > > I haven't seen the film so I'm not qualified to comment on the 'Harry > no actual tears' scene but ..... close up shots are used with extreme > caution, specifically to highlight a response or emotional, inner > state, in b/w movies they used glycerine to fake tears and I believe > still do, I imagine now they could cgi a couple if required, I find it > hard to believe they were simply too lazy to deal with this in POA the > movie. > > So I'm with Samnanya on this one. > > Taking the text and various references to crying, I see no reason why > Harry might be becoming less able to shed tears over time, given that > this is a tale of growth and change and as he becomes more affected by > his inner snake. Also why he might not shed tears when unconscious but > not when conscious, which would explain the Lupin reference. > > By the by I take Lupin tapping Harry's face (specifically not poking) > to mean some sort of reviving charm. > > What I'd like to know is if Samnanya's observation is correct what > does it mean? In the next book Harry will be dealing with grief, if he > can't shed a tear what difference does this make? Is it simply a > physical expression of Harry's inner state or does it have plot > implications as with the Phoenix tears? > > Also is it really true that Snakes don't cry? Like turtles and owls > (interesting!) they do not have eyelids but does that mean they have > no tear ducts? > > Snakes lick their eyes so do we have any tongue references!!!!? > > BTW snakes can still kill you when they are dead, because of their > muscle structure a dead snake still has many of the reflexes it had > when it was alive. > > Regards > Jo see how this one is signed, also? we may have to go back through these posts and re-visit them. moonmyyst From moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 23 00:20:01 2004 From: moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com (moonmyyst13) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 00:20:01 -0000 Subject: This one is interesting from mooseming In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120428 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mooseming" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "bowlwoman" wrote: > > I have a theory about Cho for the next 2 books, based on her past > > behaviors, friends and Rowling's website. > > > > I think Cho is going to do a turncoat thing and betray Harry at some > > point. Why? > > > > 1) Cho (the Seeker for Ravenclaw) has dated the Seekers from two > > other teams, Cedric from Hufflepuff and Harry from Gryffindor. If > > this pattern continues, Draco is next. Dating the ringleader of the > > Slytherin house who just happens to have an incarcerated Death Eater > > father can't be good. > > > > 2) Cho invited Marietta to join her in the DA, and as we all can read > > from her face, she was the one who betrayed the group to Umbridge. > > When Harry argued with Cho about Marietta's issues, Cho DEFENDED her. > > That effectively caused the rift between Harry and Cho. She now has a > > precedence for backing the wrong side (betrayer's anonymous anyone?). > > > > 3) On Rowling's website, the butterfly is an interesting creature. We > > know that Cho means "butterfly" in both Japanese and Korean. What's > > interesting about the butterfly on Rowling's site is that during the > > day it's colored blue with yellow markings (Ravenclaw colors), but at > > night it's green with silver/grey markings (Slytherin colors). Could > > this be a clue from Rowling herself that Cho isn't to be trusted? We > > don't know as of yet if it's possible to change houses once you've > > been sorted into one, but could it happen? Could Cho decide to change > > from Ravenclaw to Slytherin her 7th year and actually do it? > > > > It might be interesting to see the administrators of Hogwarts take > > the Sorting Hat's advice and try to foster better relations among the > > houses. What if they decide to start an exchange student program, > > where they rotate some students and they live in a different house > > for a term (or a week, a month, etc)? This might provide some very > > interesting plot twists as we find out what the "other side" is like > > from the inside. If this happens, then Cho might be chosen to go to > > Slytherin and betray Harry and/or the DA. > > > > bowlwoman > > I love the dating Draco idea, it rocks! > > I would like to add to this theory and say Cho, the betrayer, will > come to a sticky end (probably inadvertently by Harry's hand, although > this is based on a different theory that Harry is going to do > something very bad in the next book). > > I believe Cho is for the chop because of the form her patronus takes - > a swan. In mythology spirits of the dead may visit mortals in the form > of a swan, also swans mate for life. So the patronus is a reference to > Cedric and an indication that they belong together and therefore she > is going to have to join him!!! > > Jo ;-) From moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 23 00:21:03 2004 From: moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com (moonmyyst13) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 00:21:03 -0000 Subject: more from mooseming In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120429 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mooseming" wrote: > snip > > > > > > Mel: > > We obviously know Lupin knew Lily, but his comments about > > her 'finding the beauty in someone who couldn't find it in > > themselves' is the very first thing that springs to mind. I'm no > > follower of LOLLIPOPS but I can see how this might lend more > > credence to Kneasy's "Aggie" theory (which I find much more > > persauasive especially now). > > Snip > > What is this Aggie theory can't find it fantastic posts.... > > > > I found it VERY interesting that any mention of Harry hearing James > > was missing. I never thought the voice he heard in the book was that > > of James, I wonder if the film has inadvertently made that clearer-- > > as in the 'flashback scene' in the first film not showing James at > > all. Jame's actual presence at Godric's Hollow at the moment of VD's > > destruction is becoming less and less obvious. > > > > > > Mel > > Is the voice Snape perhaps? > > Jo From moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 23 00:22:15 2004 From: moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com (moonmyyst13) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 00:22:15 -0000 Subject: this one shows she has a sense of humor!! or does she?? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120430 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mooseming" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" > wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mooseming" > wrote: > > > > > > What is this Aggie theory can't find it fantastic posts.... > > > > Just a little bit of lateral thinking, couched in a humorous vein > > and intended as a counter to the LOLLIPOPS theorists. > > > > It's post 77800. > > > > Kneasy > > Ah thanks. > > Yes its all clear now .... why *did* Lily end up with James the bully? > Not, however, because of rejection by Snape, oh no she stayed true to > type and fell for James after being rejected by ...... Vernon Dursley. > > You know it makes sense. > > Jo From moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 23 00:26:03 2004 From: moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com (moonmyyst13) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 00:26:03 -0000 Subject: Here is an interesting Snape one In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120431 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mooseming" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" > wrote: > snip > > > > By the way, has Snape EVER left his chidhood behind? > > > > > > Alla > > What an interesting question! > > This has helped me with some things I've been thinking about for the > last couple of days. I think you have provided the missing link which > was causing me grief. > > The thoughts started along the lines of something big had to have > happened to James and Lily between years 5 (Snape's worst memory) and > year 7 to change relationship dynamics so that James stops being a > brat, Lily and James SHIP (can shipping be used as a verb like this?) > and James becomes head boy. As seen in previous threads there is a > strong parallel between HRH et al and the marauders et al so I began > to speculate that something will happen in year six to HRH and co > which will change their relationship dynamics (and possibly lead to > Seer!Ron headboy, H/R ship in book 7) and specifically lead to a more > brat like Harry, the reverse/negative of James as it were. > > As I thought along these lines it occurred to me that Snape would be > present and possibly a participant in both of these changes in > character and then I began to wonder why? > > ArrestedDevelopment !Snape is a useful tool to create a living bridge > between events in the past and current events, he can carry the > baggage, an emotional porter through time as it were. > > Snape's character is also by way of a bridge in that he shares many > experiences with both Tom and Harry, has worked for both sides, and > (as proved by extended discussion on this site) is not easily > classified as good or bad. > > Snape hasn't left Hogwart's nor the experiences of his childhood > there, his continued connection to the past is responsible for some > very bad choices and some less than noble behaviour. He can't see > Harry for what he is, only as the son of James, not even the son of Lily. > > So there he is, Snape, a living, breathing (or not if vamp!Snape), > walking example to Harry of what happens if you can't forgive and move > on. The reflection of himself that Harry has to see to make the best > choice when the time comes, and when the time comes I believe Snape > will be there. > > Why? Because Snape was there when Harry's parents were killed (ok ok > making it up now but bear with me) . > > Quote from POA (my capitals) > > "Like father, like son, Potter! I have just saved your neck you should > be thanking me on bended knee! You would have been well served if he'd > killed you! YOU'D HAVE DIED LIKE YOUR FATHER, too arrogant to believe > you might be mistaken in Black" > > Snape saw James reaction to the news he'd been betrayed (mistakenly > thinking, as everyone did, the betrayer was Black.) > > So what if Snape came to warn the Potters and James didn't believe > him, not because he was too arrogant but because he couldn't see that > Snape had the capability to change. James is then partly responsible > for Lily's and his own death because he like Snape couldn't move on > and believe in people. > > The events in Godric's hollow, Snape's role and James' role, will be a > primary motivator in the choices Harry has to make in his final > showdown with the Voldybeast. Critically Harry will have to see the > similarity between Snape and James, let go of the past and see > people's ability to change, something Lily could see all along, > something that marks you as a grown up. > > Will Snape finally grow up too? Tom Riddle didn't and look what > happened to him - is this Snape's second chance? > > Jo From moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 23 00:28:31 2004 From: moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com (moonmyyst13) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 00:28:31 -0000 Subject: Mooseming again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120432 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mooseming" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mnaper2001" > wrote: > > > Ally: > > snip > > > > But if one character was clearly right in, e.g. the occlumency > > situation/Sirius' death, it would mean JKR wasn't that good of a > > writer to begin with. What makes these scenes great is that every > > character messes up in a way that is totally consistent with that > > character's flaws - Snape flips out, DD is too protective of Harry > > and optimistic about Snape, Sirius ignores Kreacher and acts > > impetuously and Harry betrays Snape by looking into the pensieve - > > and it all comes together into a tragic event. > > > > This is what good writing does - it doesn't judge. Unfortunately, > > most readers do not follow their writer's example. > > Er NO! > > JKR most definitely judges. She clearly believes in good and bad, > right and wrong, dear god that's what these books are about!!!! > > BUT she is non judgemental i.e. has a very poor view of ill informed > judgement and delusions of superiority (Pride and Prejudice! anyone). > > (BTW Ally I have a feeling this is actually what you mean, but I > believe the distinction is critical.) > > I have to laugh when I see threads with 'blame' in them because what > JKR is really trying to say seems to me to be that blame itself is > very destructive, it is not a force for good. Actions must be judged > and dealt with but passing judgement on another being is not for us. > No matter what our justification, prior abuse, betrayal, destructive > actions with lethal results, we cannot ever be the moral authority > over someone else. > > When Harry meets Voldy he *must* understand he is not better, more > justified, greater than his enemy in anything other than the choices > he makes. Bad actions are *bad* actions regardless of the motivation. > To beat evil you have to act good, you cannot simply *be* good. > > Regards > Jo From moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 23 00:31:10 2004 From: moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com (moonmyyst13) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 00:31:10 -0000 Subject: These are interesting predictions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120433 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mooseming" wrote: > OK folks here are my predictions: > > OWLs > > Hermione will pass everything she takes, come top in everything except: > > Neville will come top in Herbology > Harry in DADA > Luna in Ancient Runes > > Ron will pass: > > Charms > Transfiguration > Care of MC > DADA > Astronomy > Potions (badly) > and ..... Divination with the highest mark! > > Harry will pass everything except Divination > He won't get an 'O' in Potions > > Neville however, will get an 'O' in Potions! > > NEWTs and House Integration in Year 6 > > NEWT classes are attended by all four houses together, so HRH will be > seeing a lot more of other house members. This year in a spirit of > interhouse friendship students will be given the opportunity to switch > houses. > > Hermione will transfer to Ravenclaw (Ron will view this as a betrayal). > Cho will transfer to Slytherin (Harry will take this well, not) > Neville will transfer to Hufflepuff, which will leave a space in Harry > and Ron's dorm for..... > A Slytherin sleeper to transfer to Gryffindor! (Who will become > Harry's best new friend). > > Harry will decide to become an Auror and will therefore take: > > DADA > Transfiguration > Charms > Potions (McGonagall will make sure he does, Snape will not be pleased) > Care of MC > > After defeating Voldemort he will change his mind and teach DADA at > Hogwarts. He will marry and twelve children all with red hair. > > Ron will decide to work in the Dept of Magical Games and Sports and > will take: > > DADA > Charms > Care of MC > Divination (to deal with gambling infringements) > Astronomy (for Divination) > > Mostly he will play Quidditch! > > Ron will, of course, never work for the ministry because he will die > an unforeseen death and become a ghost at Hogwarts. > > Neville will decide to become a Healer and take: > > DADA > Herbology > Charms > Transfiguration > Potions (Snape will no longer rattle him) > > He will become a healer and heal his parents. > > Hermione will decide to work for the Department for the Regulation and > Control of Magical Creatures (continuing to spew) and take more > subjects than anyone else, these will be: > > Charms > DADA > History of Magic > Care of MC > Ancient Runes > Arithmancy > Herbology > She will not take Transfiguration on moral grounds concluding it to be > cruel. > > Hermione will eventually become Minister for Magic and transform inter > magical species relations. From moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 23 00:34:36 2004 From: moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com (moonmyyst13) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 00:34:36 -0000 Subject: more predictions from Jo In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120434 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mooseming" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" > wrote: > snip > > > > I've occasionally posted theories on the possibilty of possession > being a > > key plot device for some time and it prompts some intriguing questions: > > > > 1. It's the Chamber of Secrets - plural. What else was down there? > > Jo > I don't know but I bet the veiled gateway started life there! > > > > 2. Heirs get an inheritance, otherwise they're not heirs, they're just > > descendants. What did Tom get? > > Jo > Well obviously he got possession of the family secret, no skeleton in > the closet, just an extra evil salazar spirit in the body. > > > > > 3. Vapour!Mort - no explanation has ever appeared telling us just > > what the nature of this thing is and yet it appears to be a unique > > phenomenon. When obvious questions are missed or glossed > > over, my thumbs prickle. Is JKR hiding something? > > Jo > Your thumbs prickle! > > JKR hide something? Not possible! > > > > > 4. If Voldy is a combinant it would maybe explain why DD calls him > > "Tom" to his face, even though he tells the kids to call him Lord > > Voldemort. If possession has taken place, DD obviously believes that > > some part of Tom still exists. > > Is he trying to persuade Tom to choose anew? To break free with an > > inevitable weakening effect on the possessing entity? > > Jo > Redemption is always a possibility, Tom has a better chance than Snape > (Joke). > > > > 5. "There are worse things than death, Tom." > > Eternal servitude to an evil master, perhaps? > > Jo > Repetitive thumb prickling > > > > 6. Vapour!Mort (possibly essence of Salazar) may be immortal or > > nearly so, but to meet his performance targets he needs a body. > > Tom did fine until he got in the way of a rebounding spell. The > > senior partner in the Voldy team doesn't want to go through the > > palaver of breaking in a new host again, so the graveyard scene > > was about producing an immortal carrier. > > Jo > If hosts are heirs then no bodies left, immortal carrier becomes > priority, we know Voldemort was trying to find immortality before the > unfortunate vapourisation perhaps this is why. > > > > 7. Harry's memories of the Godric's Hollow incident (PoA chap 9) > > are interesting, particularly if you have a suspicious mind. Lily > > is pleading with Voldy and she asks him not to 'take' Harry, but > > to take her, kill her instead. Now 'take' can be used as an alternative > > for kill, as in 'take a life' but it's use here when Harry is at the > wrong > > end of a wand seems a bit strange; 'kill' or 'hurt' would be a more > > common usage. Maybe Voldy wanted to possess Harry too. > > Jo > Suspicious mind, you hum it, I'll sing it. > Maybe Voldy thought he could transfer to Harry in place of Tom, > picking up the powers that he 'knows not' into the bargain. > > "You do not seek to kill me, Dumbledore? called Voldemort" > .....stuff..... > "We both know that there are other ways of destroying a man, Tom" > Dumbledore said calmly". > Knobbled from the inside out, that can't be pretty (the thumb > prickling alone will drive you crazy). > > > > > > 8. Lily is killed, Voldy tries to nail Harry. Strangely, Harry can > recall > > only one green flash; why not two? Some may argue that Lily was > > holding Harry and Voldy was going for two birds with one spell, but > > in that case why did the spell rebound? It hit, or partially hit, it's > > intended target - Lily. Why would there be a powerful enough > > rebound to destroy Voldy? > > Jo > Old magic my son, old magic. Voldy comes from a long line of heirs > passing on their inner salazar, presumably by some old magic. Lily is > protecting Harry with more vintage witchery. They come together and *bang* > > > > > 9. AKs cause no physical damage at all, judging by the state of Cedric. > > So how come a rebound totally destroys Voldy's body? > > The spell transferred parts of Voldy into Harry. Seems a bit odd - why > > would a killing spell transfer bits of the killer into a soon to be > corpse? > > > Jo > Perhaps transfer of Salazar essence causes death in prior host, Lily > deflected transfer, leaving it incomplete, so death also incomplete. > > > See, it raises my paranoia index when there are loose ends like these > > flapping around, and if it's possible to cobble 'em together and come > > up with a theory as a possible explanation as to what's going on, it > > makes it even more interesting. Even if nobody agrees with me. > > > > Kneasy > > Yup! > > Regards > Jo From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Thu Dec 23 00:44:08 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 00:44:08 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries / Dursleys' abuse In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120435 Alla wrote: "I disagree. I believe Carol recently (or relatively recently) gave very good description of the narrator in the books. I don't remember the correct name for such narrator, but such narrator is not ever completely objective." Del replies: I never said the narrator was supposed to be objective. We *know* right from the *beginning* that he is NOT objective : he is prejudiced against the Dursleys and at the same time he's not bothered by the abuse they inflict on Harry. Definitely not objective. Alla wrote: "The events are narrated not from Harry POV, BUT for the most part narrator only sees events from Harry POV and identifies with him only." Del replies: The narrator wasn't identifying with Harry too much when he was presenting his abuse lightly... Del From saraandra at saraandra.plus.com Thu Dec 23 01:00:32 2004 From: saraandra at saraandra.plus.com (amanitamuscaria1) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 01:00:32 -0000 Subject: The Mooseming Mystery Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120436 Hey, Moonmyyst - Cheers for digging those posts out! Heather - is that who you meant? Reading the posts on their own doesn't have the same impact - I think it seemed at the time that Jo was coming out with all this stuff, not really _from_ other postings, more like _answering_ posts? In the context of speculation at the time, and I've inhabited these pages for quite awhile, I know different people generate their ideas differently, but these posts just jumped off the page. Must have done, to remember the handle! Cheers, whoever you are, Jo! From saraandra at saraandra.plus.com Thu Dec 23 01:07:16 2004 From: saraandra at saraandra.plus.com (amanitamuscaria1) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 01:07:16 -0000 Subject: more predictions from Jo In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120437 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "moonmyyst13" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mooseming" > wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" > > wrote: > > snip > > > > > > I've occasionally posted theories on the possibilty of possession > > being a > > > key plot device for some time and it prompts some intriguing > questions: > > > > > > 1. It's the Chamber of Secrets - plural. What else was down there? > > > > Jo > > I don't know but I bet the veiled gateway started life there! Snipsnipsnip AmaintaMuscaria now - yup, this exchange is a doozy! I believe it all went quiet after this - What do you reckon? A bit too much let out of the bag? Cheers. AmanitaMuscaria From moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 23 01:08:23 2004 From: moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com (K G) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 17:08:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] The Mooseming Mystery In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041223010823.3477.qmail@web53501.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120438 amanitamuscaria1 wrote: Hey, Moonmyyst - Cheers for digging those posts out! Heather - is that who you meant? Reading the posts on their own doesn't have the same impact - I think it seemed at the time that Jo was coming out with all this stuff, not really _from_ other postings, more like _answering_ posts? In the context of speculation at the time, and I've inhabited these pages for quite awhile, I know different people generate their ideas differently, but these posts just jumped off the page. Must have done, to remember the handle! Cheers, whoever you are, Jo! If nothing else, maybe these posts will generate some new looks at some old ideas. We need something new since every way we turn these days, the list elves are lobbing snowballs (I guess someone, somewhere, is having a white christmas!!). moonmyyst --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? The all-new My Yahoo! ? Get yours free! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 23 01:28:41 2004 From: moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com (K G) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 17:28:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: more predictions from Jo In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041223012841.69064.qmail@web53506.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120439 amanitamuscaria1 wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mooseming" > wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" > > wrote: > > snip > > > > > > I've occasionally posted theories on the possibilty of possession > > being a > > > key plot device for some time and it prompts some intriguing > questions: > > > > > > 1. It's the Chamber of Secrets - plural. What else was down there? > > > > Jo > > I don't know but I bet the veiled gateway started life there! Snipsnipsnip AmaintaMuscaria now - yup, this exchange is a doozy! I believe it all went quiet after this - What do you reckon? A bit too much let out of the bag? Cheers. AmanitaMuscaria It would be interesting to know what could possibly have been started out of the veil. Why does this make me think of the riddle with "prince" as the answer? moonmyyst --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - now with 250MB free storage. Learn more. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From danielmorgan191 at hotmail.com Thu Dec 23 01:34:27 2004 From: danielmorgan191 at hotmail.com (danielmorgan322) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 01:34:27 -0000 Subject: Mooseming again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120440 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "moonmyyst13" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mooseming" > wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mnaper2001" > > wrote: > > > > > Ally: > > > snip > > > > > > But if one character was clearly right in, e.g. the occlumency > > > situation/Sirius' death, it would mean JKR wasn't that good of a > > > writer to begin with. What makes these scenes great is that > every > > > character messes up in a way that is totally consistent with that > > > character's flaws - Snape flips out, DD is too protective of > Harry > > > and optimistic about Snape, Sirius ignores Kreacher and acts > > > impetuously and Harry betrays Snape by looking into the pensieve - > > > > and it all comes together into a tragic event. > > > > > > This is what good writing does - it doesn't judge. > Unfortunately, > > > most readers do not follow their writer's example. > > > > Er NO! > > > > JKR most definitely judges. She clearly believes in good and bad, > > right and wrong, dear god that's what these books are about!!!! > > > > BUT she is non judgemental i.e. has a very poor view of ill informed > > judgement and delusions of superiority (Pride and Prejudice! > anyone). > > > > (BTW Ally I have a feeling this is actually what you mean, but I > > believe the distinction is critical.) > > > > I have to laugh when I see threads with 'blame' in them because what > > JKR is really trying to say seems to me to be that blame itself is > > very destructive, it is not a force for good. Actions must be judged > > and dealt with but passing judgement on another being is not for us. > > No matter what our justification, prior abuse, betrayal, destructive > > actions with lethal results, we cannot ever be the moral authority > > over someone else. > > > > When Harry meets Voldy he *must* understand he is not better, more > > justified, greater than his enemy in anything other than the choices > > he makes. Bad actions are *bad* actions regardless of the > motivation. > > To beat evil you have to act good, you cannot simply *be* good. > > > > Regards > > Jo For me the most important part of this whole post from Mooseming is the " Regards Jo " part. JKR uses that herself quite often doesn't she? Or am I way off here? Regards Morgan BTW I'm positive this is JKR herself. Its uncanny the way she writes. From jennifer_maccherone at yahoo.com Thu Dec 23 00:30:55 2004 From: jennifer_maccherone at yahoo.com (nifferhpfan) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 00:30:55 -0000 Subject: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 34, "The Department of Mysteries" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120441 Bethany wrote: > > When riding the Thestrals to the Ministry of Magic, could > >the riders be seen? Can only people who see thestrals normally > be able to see the riders during flight? > I think maybe Thestrals' riders are invisible. Niffer writes: If the thestrals make their riders invisible, wouldn't they also then make the carriages invisible? Or maybe there is not enough contact in that case. Bethany also wrote: > Luna? Well, we > don't know who she saw die, Niffer writes: Remember she saw her mother die accidentally from a spell gone wrong. From jennifer_maccherone at yahoo.com Thu Dec 23 00:55:00 2004 From: jennifer_maccherone at yahoo.com (nifferhpfan) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 00:55:00 -0000 Subject: Butterflies (Was Re: This one is interesting from mooseming) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120442 "Jo" wrote: > > > I have a theory about Cho ... I think Cho is going to do a turncoat thing and betray Harry at some point. Why? ... We know that Cho means "butterfly" in both Japanese and Korean. > What's interesting about the butterfly on Rowling's site is that during the day it's colored blue with yellow markings (Ravenclaw colors),but at night it's green with silver/grey markings (Slytherin colors). Could this be a clue from Rowling herself that Cho isn't to be trusted? > Niffer writes: I was rereading GOF today and saw this (Ch 31)Professor McGonagall says: "Miss Patil, take that ridiculous thing out of your hair." Parvati scowled and removed a large ornamental butterfly from the end of her plait. In OOTP, while taking the O.W.L.'s Harry is entranced by Parvati's glistening hair. Now that Harry is over Cho it is less likely that she will be in a position to hurt him. Maybe it is Parvati that will change colors and betray him? From moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 23 02:07:50 2004 From: moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com (K G) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 18:07:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Butterflies (Was Re: This one is interesting from mooseming) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041223020750.18588.qmail@web53501.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120443 nifferhpfan wrote: Niffer writes: I was rereading GOF today and saw this (Ch 31)Professor McGonagall says: "Miss Patil, take that ridiculous thing out of your hair." Parvati scowled and removed a large ornamental butterfly from the end of her plait. In OOTP, while taking the O.W.L.'s Harry is entranced by Parvati's glistening hair. Now that Harry is over Cho it is less likely that she will be in a position to hurt him. Maybe it is Parvati that will change colors and betray him? Do you mean in a SHIP kind of way or by way of the D.A.? moonmyyst --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Easier than ever with enhanced search. Learn more. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From a_b_desert_king at hotmail.com Thu Dec 23 02:13:00 2004 From: a_b_desert_king at hotmail.com (a_b_desert_king) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 02:13:00 -0000 Subject: The Mooseming Mystery In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120444 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "amanitamuscaria1" wrote: > > Hey, Moonmyyst - Cheers for digging those posts out! > Heather - is that who you meant? > Reading the posts on their own doesn't have the same impact - I think > it seemed at the time that Jo was coming out with all this stuff, not > really _from_ other postings, more like _answering_ posts? In the > context of speculation at the time, and I've inhabited these pages > for quite awhile, I know different people generate their ideas > differently, but these posts just jumped off the page. > Must have done, to remember the handle! > Cheers, whoever you are, Jo! Heather now: It must have been. I remember thinking that the pen name sounded just mysterious enough to be JKR and, like you said, the tone of the posts was different. Kind of interesting to sit back and read them one after another isn't it? OTOH, who's to say she didn't throw us a whole bunch of red herrings just to keep us debating in earnest? I just spent the last 5 minutes giggling my fool head off by imagining Jo sitting there sending us a bunch of great info and we just passed it on by.... >From myself as well: Cheers, whoever you are, Jo! From sevenhundredandthirteen at yahoo.com Thu Dec 23 02:21:03 2004 From: sevenhundredandthirteen at yahoo.com (sevenhundredandthirteen) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 02:21:03 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries / Dursleys' abuse/Narration In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120445 Laurasia (talking about ideas from this entire thread smooshed together): The HP narrator in OotP gives the impression relating facts, not telling a story. PS starts with a much more visible narrator,`On the dull, grey Tuesday our story starts ' which suggest that the whole HP saga is really just a constructed tale which never happened. OotP was much more "filmic," especially in it's climax at the DoM, than any of the other books. OotP is more like a series of scenes- less is `cut out' and condensed, whereas PS has many sections where entire weeks go by in only one or two sentences. IMO, part of the shift in narration/tone from PS to OotP is that the narrator `tells' less of the story, and just `describes' it from an invisible sideline. By the time we reach OotP the narrator is has less of a presence in the story so we are left with the possibility of using our own judgment and emotional response, not relying so much on the narrator's. Because of this, I would suggest that, at this point in the series, JKR is actively encouraging people to use their own emotional response to the situation. IMO, by making the narrator slip away we are left alone and are *forced* to engage emotionally with the story and project a bit of ourselves back into it. Kneasy's assertion that people who project their own emotional values onto the story are missing the point of reading a story is very true for the first part of the HP series. However, the inverse opinion that one must respond emotionally to the situation to gain meaning from it is very true of the later part of the series. I think part of the reason why there are two distinct camps is because JKR hasn't been consistent. I find this inconsistency a problem. Others won't call it an inconsistency, but a progression in tone and maturity of the story. But I agree with Del- changing the style of narration/genre partway through a series is dangerous. In contrast, Lemony Snicket's "A Series of Unfortunate Events" consistently uses an incredibly visible narrator, so there is no ambiguity at all about how we are meant to respond to situations and characters. Lemony Snicket censors and interprets the story and lets the reader know when he does such things. If the HP narrator is censoring or interpreting the story, we are not aware of it. And ASOUE has a shift in tone as well- it started off with its evil guy as genuinely cruel, and made him comical. But because the narrator tells us all along, we just went with it. By changing the style of narration, maybe JKR wants people to start using their own emotional responses. Maybe she has specifically designed the story so the narrator slips away book by book and no longer gives his external point of view on the whole thing. Maybe she wants us to be left inside Harry's head more and more. Or else, JKR thinks she is clearer than she is and has just naturally stopped using a visible narrator because she thinks it is no longer necessary. I think it's the latter. How many times has she told us that we are wrong to like Draco? IMO, JKR believes that her intentions are clear, when they are open to interpretation. I do not think that stories which use more visible narrators are worse or better than those which do not. Using a more objective/invisible narrator leaves much more ambiguity (there is much more fanfic out there based on movies and TV shows, media which often use a more objective narrator, than there is on books). And using a visible/opinionated narrator means that there is no mistaking the author's intent. But I do think that the more visible the narrator, the more flaws in the story can be smoothed over. The more we are aware that `this is just a story' the more we are prepared to forgive. JKR has stopped using such a visible narrator who interprets events (like the Dursley's treatment of Harry) for us, and, to compensate, she has had to become a much more visible author. She has had to tell us herself through her website which characters we are mean to like, which ones are misunderstood and which ones should never be tarnished. ~<(Laurasia)>~ From moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 23 02:25:40 2004 From: moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com (K G) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 18:25:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The Mooseming Mystery In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041223022540.39115.qmail@web53505.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120446 a_b_desert_king wrote: Heather now: It must have been. I remember thinking that the pen name sounded just mysterious enough to be JKR and, like you said, the tone of the posts was different. Kind of interesting to sit back and read them one after another isn't it? OTOH, who's to say she didn't throw us a whole bunch of red herrings just to keep us debating in earnest? I just spent the last 5 minutes giggling my fool head off by imagining Jo sitting there sending us a bunch of great info and we just passed it on by.... >From myself as well: Cheers, whoever you are, Jo! I keep coming back to the statement on her website that she spent some time in a chat room and no one took her serious so she went on to a Sponge Bob site. Then comes the statement earlier today about her monitoring the chat sites on monday and tuesday. You never know. moonmyyst (with Jo a very Harry Christmas... who ever she is) __________________________________________________ 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 a_b_desert_king at hotmail.com Thu Dec 23 02:33:23 2004 From: a_b_desert_king at hotmail.com (a_b_desert_king) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 02:33:23 -0000 Subject: The Mooseming Mystery In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120447 Mooseming's very first post: I went back and found that Jo's date of joining was June 27, 2003. So I started searching. Here is her first post: (#64851) Heather >From: "mooseming" >Date: Fri Jun 27, 2003 7:04 am >Subject: Harry's scar a snake? >Hi >anybody else beginning to suspect that the 'lightening bolt' could in >fact be a snake shaped scar? What could this mean? >cheers >jo From templar1112002 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 23 02:50:19 2004 From: templar1112002 at yahoo.com (templar1112002) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 02:50:19 -0000 Subject: These are interesting predictions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120448 "mooseming" wrote: > > OK folks here are my predictions: > > > > OWLs > > > > Hermione will pass everything she takes, come top in everything > except: > > > > Neville will come top in Herbology > > Harry in DADA > > Luna in Ancient Runes > > *******OK, didn't anybody notice that Luna did not take the OWLS yet? That is a big 'ooops' if Jo is the real Jo. Marcela From stevejjen at earthlink.net Thu Dec 23 02:56:10 2004 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 02:56:10 -0000 Subject: Did Snape Try to Warn James at GH? (Re: Here is an interesting Snape one) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120449 Mooseming: > > Why? Because Snape was there when Harry's parents were killed(ok > > ok making it up now but bear with me). > > "Like father, like son, Potter! I have just saved your neck you > > should be thanking me on bended knee! You would have been well > > served if he'd killed you! YOU'D HAVE DIED LIKE YOUR FATHER, too > > arrogant to believeyou might be mistaken in Black" > > (POA, my capitals) > > Snape saw James reaction to the news he'd been betrayed > >(mistakenly thinking, as everyone did, the betrayer was Black.) > > So what if Snape came to warn the Potters and James didn't > > believe him, not because he was too arrogant but because he > > couldn't see that Snape had the capability to change. James is > > then partly responsible for Lily's and his own death because he > > like Snape couldn't move on and believe in people. Jen: Whether Mooseming is JKR or not, this is the best explanation I've seen for why Snape hated James and hates Harry even more. If he stuck his neck out to save James that night at GH, gave up his cover and risked his own life, and James laughed in his face or refused to believe him or even attempted to curse/hex him.....whoo, boy, I can't see Snape ever forgetting or forgiving that. And what was it Dumbledore said in PS, that Snape could go back to hating James in peace? That would make sense too in light of this theory. Snape goes to save James and Lily at GH, and repay his life debt in the process, and James doesn't believe him, chooses to believe Sirius instead. Snape not only can't save James, but he's still in debt to a dead man. He nurses that wound until one day Harry Potter shows up at Hogwarts, looking just like James. Mooseming: > > The events in Godric's hollow, Snape's role and James' role, > > will be a primary motivator in the choices Harry has to make in > > his final showdown with the Voldybeast. Critically Harry will > > have to see the similarity between Snape and James, let go of > > the past and see people's ability to change, something Lily > > could see all along, something that marks you as a grown up. Jen: But first he has to find out about Snape. I'm not sure Harry's in any mood to have a nice chat with Snape. Will DD finally spill the beans? There's no way Harry can make this critical choice without all the information as we found out in OOTP. There's no Black in the way now to muck things up or blame things on. Ron seems to be the one in the Trio who has the most child-like moral reasoning good/evil--Snape can't change, once you've gone bad you can never be redeemed. Hermione puts her faith in Dumbledore, a more mature response but one based on a decision outside herself. Harry is the one with the moral dilemma, the choice to make inside himself about Snape--has Snape truly changed and can Harry in turn change his view of Snape? Jen, wondering if anyone has written mooseming to tell her she's very popular on the list at the moment? ;) From poppytheelf at hotmail.com Thu Dec 23 03:30:19 2004 From: poppytheelf at hotmail.com (Phyllis) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 03:30:19 -0000 Subject: ADMIN: Make Your Posts Count Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120450 Greetings from Hexquarters! 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 and make a canon point. Canon is defined as the known works or words of JK Rowling. Speculation on whether Rowling is a member of HPfGU and references to posts that she may have written should be taken over to our OT-Chatter list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-OTChatter . 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.) For further information, please check out our posting guidelines at http://www.hpfgu.org.uk/hbfile.html#2 . Thank you for your cooperation, Poppy Elf for the HPfGU List Administration Team From gopotter2004 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 23 03:29:11 2004 From: gopotter2004 at yahoo.com (gopotter2004) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 03:29:11 -0000 Subject: These are interesting predictions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120451 > *******OK, didn't anybody notice that Luna did not take the OWLS yet? > That is a big 'ooops' if Jo is the real Jo. > > Marcela Actually, that post prickled me all over with its misleading statements... some of the other posts I thought could be legit, so I think she's really just messing with us here! I'm going to alternate between her comments, paraphrased, and mine(I'll make sure you can tell they're mine!) Ron will pass..."Divination with the highest mark!" Now me: If I'm not mistaken, Ron looked into the crystal ball and described a bald man... only to look up and see that he was describing his proctor. Highest marks? Not likely... unless everyone else was miserable at it. "This year in a spirit of interhouse friendship students will be given the opportunity to switch houses. Hermione will transfer to Ravenclaw (Ron will view this as a betrayal). Cho will transfer to Slytherin (Harry will take this well, not) Neville will transfer to Hufflepuff, which will leave a space in Harry and Ron's dorm for..... A Slytherin sleeper to transfer to Gryffindor! (Who will become Harry's best new friend)." ME: Now wait JUST ONE MINUTE. I'm a firm believer that Hermione, of ALL of them, would have read something in Hogwarts: A history that would make her want to stay where the sorting hat put her. And Neville not a gryffindor? It would be easier to convince me that Harry and Tom Riddle are really twins separated at birth and then time-warped... Really though: Neville has demonstrated very gryffindor tendencies since the first book (a great deal of bravery to stand up to your friends) and he progressed leaps and bounds during the 5th book. However, the idea of a Slytherin sleeper... well, Theodore Nott as the Half Blood Prince (but that's all I'll say on that-- I don't feel like the inter-house mingling is going to go over very well for me, at least, if she tries to pull it... though I'm sure she'd have very solid reasons and I'd get used to it.) "After defeating Voldemort he will change his mind and teach DADA at Hogwarts. He will marry and twelve children all with red hair." Me: I feel like we're being mocked-- though this should please the Harry/Ginny shippers. Didn't Trelawney once say he was going to become Minister of magic and have 12 kids? Somehow....doesn't seem very Harry to me. On top of the fact that JKR has stated many times that none of the trio will be teaching at Hogwarts in the future... "Ron will, of course, never work for the ministry because he will die an unforeseen death and become a ghost at Hogwarts." Me: This leaves me disgruntled because of the conversation Nearly Headless Nick had with Harry at the end of OotP. Ron, sans spiders, has never seemed to be a coward to me-- a bit of a joke, sometimes, but when it comes down to it, he has the courage to face things that would make plenty of people crumble-- after all, he sacrificed himself to the queen in the chess game. Basically, my ramble means I can't believe that he wouldn't pass on when faced with the choice: He adores Dumbledore, and he probably would remember that "death is but the next great adventure." "[Neville] will become a healer and heal his parents." Me: Well, this would be nice-- and vaguely plausible, actually, with his interest in Herbology-- but it does seem like QUITE the simplification. Now I'm just being ornery. "[Hermione] will not take Transfiguration on moral grounds concluding it to be cruel." Me: This one really bugs me. DD AND MMg have both been transfiguration professors, which as far as I'm concerned takes away the possibility of cruelty. After all, DD is one of the only wizards that seems to take Hermione's house elf SPEWing to mean anything-- even if they've never talked about it, he hired Dobby, definitely a step in the non-cruel direction. Of course, she wouldn't want to tell us EVERYTHING. But I did feel like there was plenty of eye-rolling information in this post. :-) A VERY pleased Becky who hopes she's a camp counselor so that she gets to read Harry with dozens of kids! From luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca Thu Dec 23 03:40:10 2004 From: luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca (Brenda) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 03:40:10 -0000 Subject: Snape at Godrics Hollow Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120452 Luckdragon: I have been posting the unpopular theory that the Potters were in possession of the P/S stone at the time of their demise. If, as suggested in recent threads, Snape was there to warn the Potters it would make perfect sense that he would have collected the stone and taken it to Dumbledore. This would have prevented the deatheaters from getting a hold of the stone and would have demonstrated to Dumbledore that Snape was no longer on Voldemorts side' which is why Dumbledore believes Snape. I think after the Potters rejected Snapes warning he must have hid nearby to see what happened. Either before or after Hagrid collected Harry' Snape would have snuck in and retrieved the stone. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 23 03:51:59 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 03:51:59 -0000 Subject: Snape at Godrics Hollow In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120453 > Luckdragon: I have been posting the unpopular theory that the Potters were in possession of the P/S stone at the time of their demise. If, as suggested in recent threads, Snape was there to warn the Potters it would make perfect sense that he would have collected the stone and taken it to Dumbledore. This would have prevented the deatheaters from getting a hold of the stone and would have demonstrated to Dumbledore that Snape was no longer on Voldemorts side' which is why Dumbledore believes Snape. I think after the Potters rejected Snapes warning he must have hid nearby to see what happened. Either before or after Hagrid collected Harry' Snape would have snuck in and retrieved the stone. Alla: Interesting. Personally I am almost sure that Snape tried to warn James, but I don't know whether it happened at Godric Hollow. I think that his warning was specifically not to trust Sirius, but it is just speculation of course. I am entirely willing to assume that Snape was at Godric Hollow, although now I tend to lean more to the speculation that Harry himself went to Godric Hollow and failed to save his parents. Are you saying that Snape's first meeting with Dumbledore after him serving Voldie was when Snape gave the Stone back to Dumbledore? Wouldn't it contradict Dumbledore's assertion that Snape deflected prior to Voldemort's fall, or have I read your theory incorrectly and you are saying that Snape was already on Dumbledore's side when he gave him stone back? From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 23 03:59:56 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 03:59:56 -0000 Subject: Character Discussion: Lily In-Reply-To: <20041222171033.33426.qmail@web25101.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120454 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Hans Andr?a wrote: snip. > If my theory of what Harry Potter is about is correct, > this means that we all have within us something so > ineffably precious, so utterly sublime, so > inexpressibly supernal that it should make us feel our > heart is filled with a swelling balloon as Jo puts it. > Just think: no matter what our physical circumstances, > no matter what our role in life or where we live, we > have the potential to open our hearts to the Lily > within and give birth to Harry, who will go on a long > and painful struggle to defeat the Voldemort within > us, ending in total liberation and the restoration of > the inner Prince as heir to the everlasting Kingdom. > Go Harry! > Hans Alla: Hans, I loved your post and cannot wait for you to explore the symbolism in the other characters. Quick question - so far Lily seems to be personification of sacrificial love of the mother for her son and does not have any flaws, which we know about. What if the next books reveal Lily as much more flawed character than we knew before, do you think your interpretation will still stand? Again, I loved it very much. From luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca Thu Dec 23 04:05:55 2004 From: luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca (Bee Chase) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 23:05:55 -0500 (EST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape at Godrics Hollow In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041223040555.1706.qmail@web52008.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120455 dumbledore11214 wrote: > Luckdragon: I have been posting the unpopular theory that the Potters were in possession of the P/S stone at the time of their demise. If, as suggested in recent threads, Snape was there to warn the Potters it would make perfect sense that he would have collected the stone and taken it to Dumbledore. This would have prevented the deatheaters from getting a hold of the stone and would have demonstrated to Dumbledore that Snape was no longer on Voldemorts side' which is why Dumbledore believes Snape. I think after the Potters rejected Snapes warning he must have hid nearby to see what happened. Either before or after Hagrid collected Harry' Snape would have snuck in and retrieved the stone. Alla: Interesting. Personally I am almost sure that Snape tried to warn James, but I don't know whether it happened at Godric Hollow. I think that his warning was specifically not to trust Sirius, but it is just speculation of course. I am entirely willing to assume that Snape was at Godric Hollow, although now I tend to lean more to the speculation that Harry himself went to Godric Hollow and failed to save his parents. Are you saying that Snape's first meeting with Dumbledore after him serving Voldie was when Snape gave the Stone back to Dumbledore? Wouldn't it contradict Dumbledore's assertion that Snape deflected prior to Voldemort's fall, or have I read your theory incorrectly and you are saying that Snape was already on Dumbledore's side when he gave him stone back? Luckdragon: I think Snape learning of Voldemorts plans to go after the Potters may have been a turning point for Snape. It is possible he approached Dumbledore previous to the attack, but his attempt to warn the Potters and returning the stone after the attack would have sealed the deal to Dumbledore. Are you aware of any canon which I may have missed to support Snape having turned prior to the Godric's Hollow incident. If Snape had left the Voldemort before the Potters deaths Voldemort would have known and been more specific when the deatheaters minus Snape were reunited in GOF. 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 dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 23 04:14:30 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 04:14:30 -0000 Subject: Snape at Godrics Hollow In-Reply-To: <20041223040555.1706.qmail@web52008.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120456 > Luckdragon: > > I think Snape learning of Voldemorts plans to go after the Potters may have been a turning point for Snape. It is possible he approached Dumbledore previous to the attack, but his attempt to warn the Potters and returning the stone after the attack would have sealed the deal to Dumbledore. Are you aware of any canon which I may have missed to support Snape having turned prior to the Godric's Hollow incident. If Snape had left the Voldemort before the Potters deaths Voldemort would have known and been more specific when the deatheaters minus Snape were reunited in GOF. Alla: I am aware of the canon which says that Snape deflected prior to Voldemort's fall. If he did it after GH incident, then technically it would be after Voldemort's fall,right? Someone (Juli?) recently reminded me of this quote in the different discussion . Remember when Dumbledore vouches for Snape in GoF?: "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." - p.391, GoF, paperback. About Voldemort being more specific... Well, I think he was. I think Snape is the one who left him forever, but I am aware that there had been multiple interpretations. Just my opinion. From willsonkmom at msn.com Thu Dec 23 04:25:41 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 04:25:41 -0000 Subject: So, children series or not? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120457 Alla: > Do you think it somehow supports the idea that JKR orients the books > towards the younger audience? Do you think it is only publishers > opinion? > Potioncat: I think it is publisher's opinion. When I first heard of HP, my son was in 4th or 5th grade (9 or 10yrs old) I knew one girl who was reading it, but it was over my kids' reading level. Of course, IMHO, each of the books has grown up with Harry...both in vocabulary and theme. From patkin at easternct.edu Thu Dec 23 00:04:29 2004 From: patkin at easternct.edu (TOLES-PATKIN,Terri (Communications)) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 19:04:29 -0500 Subject: Application for Head of House - Binns Message-ID: <767D98BAB669E74E8CFCB861554159FB02E00003@ecsube2.ec-admin.easternct.edu> No: HPFGUIDX 120458 Tammy in #120397: >> Binns - hey, if a ghost can be a teacher, why not head of house? Okay, so he's probably too dull, maybe he's a Hufflepuff.<< Seems to me that only a true academic - i.e. Ravenclaw - would keep teaching after he's dead. Terri From luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca Thu Dec 23 04:41:16 2004 From: luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca (Bee Chase) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 23:41:16 -0500 (EST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape at Godrics Hollow In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041223044116.40859.qmail@web52009.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120459 Alla: I am aware of the canon which says that Snape deflected prior to Voldemort's fall. If he did it after GH incident, then technically it would be after Voldemort's fall,right? Someone (Juli?) recently reminded me of this quote in the different discussion . Remember when Dumbledore vouches for Snape in GoF?: "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." - p.391, GoF, paperback. About Voldemort being more specific... Well, I think he was. I think Snape is the one who left him forever, but I am aware that there had been multiple interpretations. Just my opinion. Luckdragon: The quote where Dumbledore vouches for Snape does prove Snape was already on the side of the order, but this could still have happened after Snape learned the Potters were in danger. Learning of the attack would have been the turning point that made him join the order He then would have alerted Dumbledore and gone to the Potters to warn them when danger became iminent. Thanks for reminding me of that quote. I agree Snape was the deatheater he was referring to in the latter quote, however; if Voldemort knew Snape had left them beforehand I would think he would be more specific than simply saying he feared he had left them forever. More like "Snape caused my downfall bring me his head". 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 Sponsor Get unlimited calls to U.S./Canada --------------------------------- 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 lea_petra at yahoo.com Thu Dec 23 00:15:34 2004 From: lea_petra at yahoo.com (Mari Lea) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 16:15:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: So, children series or not? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041223001534.75543.qmail@web60007.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120460 Alla wrote: > I went to preorder the book to bn.com and on the > advertisement page it still says age range 9-12. > > Do you think it somehow supports the idea that > JKR orients the books towards the younger audience? > Do you think it is only publishers' opinion? I think that is more of the publishers doing. Because I don't think any author could sit down and write a book just for 6 year olds, but the publisher has to put some sort of age recommendation on the books, so you get that range. In retrospect, as a child I never went by those guidelines; my mom let me buy all of my reading material on my own. I was reading books for adults at 9. My favorite authors ranged from Judy Blume to Ray Bradbury. Same with my son. One minute he will be reading Captain Underpants, the next he is trying to read The Book of Lost Tales. JKRowling's books always seemed to me stories that work on many levels. I do wish I could read these stories as a child, but my adult experiences change how I see them. So it's great when my son and I will read the same book together; he catches things I missed and vice a versa. It is too bad that in the US, especially, when something is deemed a children's story, people have the tendency to think it won't be deep or entertaining. Which is a pity with stories as good as Harry Potter. "lea_petra" From willsonkmom at msn.com Thu Dec 23 04:45:14 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 04:45:14 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120461 > Del replies: > Hum, I hate to say that, but usually those things come to us without > us asking for them. When Eloise Herisson tried to discuss Snape as a > plot device, her thread immediately became invaded by emotional > responses to Snape that were totally irrelevant to the matter. > Similarly, it's not really a surprise if way too many threads, no > matter how they started originally, end up discussing either Snape's > nastiness or the Dursleys' abuse of Harry : that's emotional > highjacking, that's what it is :-) > Potioncat: And when I tried to continue it, it fizzled out. I've posted my share of emotional posts, so I won't throw stones. But it is difficult to discuss plot and narrative devices when the argument turns to "Yes but he was to blame" or "but he should have..." Maybe we need a heading for certain types of discussions like we have for FILKS or SHIPS...DEVICE (Don't even voice "I"-Centric Emotions) (which is why you don't ever my name on T-Bay) Potioncat From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Thu Dec 23 04:55:54 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 20:55:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: Predictions Message-ID: <20041223045554.25141.qmail@web53105.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120462 I didn't add my predictions: 1- DD WILL NOT die 2- The TRIO will remain as is 3- Neville will get quite a few OWLS (even in potions) 4- Harry will meet LV or his DEs at the beginning of the book, not at the end as usual. 5- Harry will have his first Birthday party ever and he'll receive something from either his parents or Sirius. 6- Remus is NOT ESE 7- The Malfoys get into trouble: Draco doesn't get enough OWLS, Lucius remains in jail, and Narcissa, well she may get signed (=dark mark). 8- Ron will fully realize his feelings for Hermione 9- We'll see Crookshanks (sp????)a lot more 10- Harry will take NEWT classes for becoming and Auror, Ron on the other hand won't, he'll choose a new career, maybe at the MoM. 11- Hermione will realize there's no point of SPEW, the elves are happy the way they are. 12- Firenze will be allowed back into the forest. 13- We'll hear one last 'true' prophecy from Trelawney before she dies all of a sudden. 14- Tonks or Bill will be the new DADA teacher (probably Bill since Tonks as an Auror has too much work already). 15- Arthur will get a better paid job at the MoM 16- The new MoM will be an Order Member (Kingsley) (sp?) 17- We'll find out who was at Godric Hollow and what happened during the missing 24 hours. 18- Petunia will tell Harry all she knows about the WW and will give him some of Lily's old belongings. I just wanted to wish everyone a very merry Christmas, and a happy new year!!! when I hope all your dreams come true. I'll be posting again in January. I'm going to the Caribbean tomorrow where it'll be warm and sunny. Happy Holidays Everyone!!! JULI- Who's hoping not to miss anything important while she's away. From sherriola at earthlink.net Thu Dec 23 06:03:32 2004 From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 23:03:32 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Snape at Godrics Hollow In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <003d01c4e8b5$22910330$0400a8c0@pensive> No: HPFGUIDX 120463 Luckdragon: I have been posting the unpopular theory that the Potters were in possession of the P/S stone at the time of their demise. If, as suggested in recent threads, Snape was there to warn the Potters it would make perfect sense that he would have collected the stone and taken it to Dumbledore. This would have prevented the deatheaters from getting a hold of the stone and would have demonstrated to Dumbledore that Snape was no longer on Voldemorts side' which is why Dumbledore believes Snape. I think after the Potters rejected Snapes warning he must have hid nearby to see what happened. Either before or after Hagrid collected Harry' Snape would have snuck in and retrieved the stone. Sherry now There's one problem with this theory, though I find it a fascinating theory, ... but how would Snape have found them? They are under the fidelius charm. If he had indeed found them, then it seems James would have known Peter spilled the beans. Not that the knowledge would have changed anything, because there wasn't time for James to tell. I know we've been over the whole, how-could-Dumbledore-know ... about the happenings at GH, but it stretches my mind a bit to think Snape could have known where the potters were. Sherry G From sherriola at earthlink.net Thu Dec 23 06:13:05 2004 From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 23:13:05 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape at Godrics Hollow In-Reply-To: <20041223044116.40859.qmail@web52009.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <003f01c4e8b6$781f0fd0$0400a8c0@pensive> No: HPFGUIDX 120464 Luckdragon: The quote where Dumbledore vouches for Snape does prove Snape was already on the side of the order, but this could still have happened after Snape learned the Potters were in danger. Learning of the attack would have been the turning point that made him join the order He then would have alerted Dumbledore and gone to the Potters to warn them when danger became iminent. Thanks for reminding me of that quote. Sherry: If this was the case, then it seems Snape would have known that Peter was the traitor, and it would make his treatment of Sirius in POA despicable, planning to send an innocent man to be kissed by the dementors? Remember, Snape couldn't have known where the potters were unless the secret keeper revealed it. If he knew they were in danger, and he knew where they were, then he knew Peter was the spy. Even for those who ascribe to the ESE Sirius theory--which I do not--Snape has never said anything to indicate he knows it from personal knowledge. My mixed feelings about Snape would make me love to have him be the one trying to warn the Potters, but I just don't see how he could have. if you can, please clarify. Sherry From luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca Thu Dec 23 06:32:39 2004 From: luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca (Bee Chase) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 01:32:39 -0500 (EST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Snape at Godrics Hollow In-Reply-To: <003d01c4e8b5$22910330$0400a8c0@pensive> Message-ID: <20041223063239.38082.qmail@web52008.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120465 Sherry Gomes wrote: Luckdragon: I have been posting the unpopular theory that the Potters were in possession of the P/S stone at the time of their demise. If, as suggested in recent threads, Snape was there to warn the Potters it would make perfect sense that he would have collected the stone and taken it to Dumbledore. This would have prevented the deatheaters from getting a hold of the stone and would have demonstrated to Dumbledore that Snape was no longer on Voldemorts side' which is why Dumbledore believes Snape. I think after the Potters rejected Snapes warning he must have hid nearby to see what happened. Either before or after Hagrid collected Harry' Snape would have snuck in and retrieved the stone. Sherry now There's one problem with this theory, though I find it a fascinating theory, ... but how would Snape have found them? They are under the fidelius charm. If he had indeed found them, then it seems James would have known Peter spilled the beans. Not that the knowledge would have changed anything, because there wasn't time for James to tell. I know we've been over the whole, how-could-Dumbledore-know ... about the happenings at GH, but it stretches my mind a bit to think Snape could have known where the potters were. Sherry G Luckdragon: I think things would have happened quite quickly. Sirius tells James to make Peter secret keeper, not knowing Peter is a traitor. Peter runs off to tell Voldemort (Snape listens in) Snape races off to warn the Potter's while Voldemort finishes talking to Peter and makes his own way to GH. The Potters do not believe Snape. It is good friend Pettidrew vs. nemesis Snape. Snape gets out just prior to Voldemorts arrival. 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 Sponsor Get unlimited calls to U.S./Canada --------------------------------- 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 luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca Thu Dec 23 06:36:22 2004 From: luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca (Bee Chase) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 01:36:22 -0500 (EST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape at Godrics Hollow In-Reply-To: <003f01c4e8b6$781f0fd0$0400a8c0@pensive> Message-ID: <20041223063622.43341.qmail@web52006.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120466 Sherry Gomes wrote: Luckdragon: The quote where Dumbledore vouches for Snape does prove Snape was already on the side of the order, but this could still have happened after Snape learned the Potters were in danger. Learning of the attack would have been the turning point that made him join the order He then would have alerted Dumbledore and gone to the Potters to warn them when danger became iminent. Thanks for reminding me of that quote. Sherry: If this was the case, then it seems Snape would have known that Peter was the traitor, and it would make his treatment of Sirius in POA despicable, planning to send an innocent man to be kissed by the dementors? Remember, Snape couldn't have known where the potters were unless the secret keeper revealed it. If he knew they were in danger, and he knew where they were, then he knew Peter was the spy. Even for those who ascribe to the ESE Sirius theory--which I do not--Snape has never said anything to indicate he knows it from personal knowledge. My mixed feelings about Snape would make me love to have him be the one trying to warn the Potters, but I just don't see how he could have. if you can, please clarify. Sherry Luckdragon: If Snape did not overhear it himself he may have heard it from Voldemort or another deatheater very shortly after. Couldn't you just hear Lucius bragging to fellow deatheater Snape that the Potters whereabouts were out and Voldemort was preparing to go to GH to do them in. 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 theadimail at yahoo.co.in Thu Dec 23 08:56:24 2004 From: theadimail at yahoo.co.in (theadimail) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 08:56:24 -0000 Subject: a new theory on who HBP might be Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120467 Hi, Eventhough this has been done to death I just wanted to have a shot at guessing who the HBP might be. I think he might be the heir of Gryffindor, just as Voldemort was the heir of Slytherin. Many people assume that Harry is the heir, but it is not necessary because at the end of CoS Dumbledore only says that Harry is a true Gryffindor. So how this going to be foreshadowed in \CoS? I imagined at the beginning of writing CoS Jo might have planned that the heir of Gryffindor would come to Hogwarts asthe DADA teacher and at the end of it, will give him the sword to vanquish the basilisk. But once Jo realised the heir had a bigger role to play in the sixth book, she gave this job to Dumbledore and the sorting hat and wrote in Gilderoy Lockheart who has absolutely nothing to do in that book. So what will the heir be in the new book? He will be either the new DADA teacher or the new minister of magic. I would vote for the latter, because Dumbledore had lot of problems finding a DADA teacher all these years, so if HBP were the one there must have been a pretty strong reason why he didn't materialise before this. So the new minister of magic will be the heir of Gryffindor and also the HBP and the lion-man, who will have a lot to do with bequeathing to Harry more of Gryffindor's powers. bye adi From yutu75es at yahoo.es Thu Dec 23 09:26:59 2004 From: yutu75es at yahoo.es (fridwulfa) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 10:26:59 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Mooseming again References: Message-ID: <003701c4e8d1$8f967e30$2101a8c0@portatil> No: HPFGUIDX 120468 Morgan wrote: > For me the most important part of this whole post from Mooseming is > the " Regards Jo " part. JKR uses that herself quite often doesn't > she? Or am I way off here? > Me: Fridwulfa: I don't know in one of her posts she predicts the results of the OWLS and says Luna will be Top on Ancient Runes, when everyone knows Luna is a year younger than Harry and co. and therefore didn't sit the exams. Or maybe she was just trying to hide her identity behind a few blatant mistakes? Mooseming is not the only one that could be Jo in disguise, I quite recently suspected another member of the group and even sent her a private email congratulating her on her posts and asking her, because her knowledge and understanding of the characters seemed to be a bit suspicious, of course she told me she was not JK, but let's face, even if she were she would never admit it, right?. If I were Jo and were lurking in one of this forums I certainly wouldn't sign with my real name, and I'd enjoy misleading people as much as possible with the most preposterous and unlikely theories. A bit of healthy twisted humor. Cheers, Fridwulfa From kcawte at ntlworld.com Thu Dec 23 09:53:08 2004 From: kcawte at ntlworld.com (slytherinspirit) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 09:53:08 -0000 Subject: Mooseming again In-Reply-To: <003701c4e8d1$8f967e30$2101a8c0@portatil> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120469 > If I were Jo and were lurking in one of this forums I certainly wouldn't > sign with my real name, and I'd enjoy misleading people as much as possible > with the most preposterous and unlikely theories. A bit of healthy twisted > humor. > Cheers, > Fridwulfa I knew there was a rational explanation for the ESE!Lupin theory ...... I suspect that if JKR is a member (and I suspect she might be) she probably *never* posts, because a) once she started the temptation to drop hints might well be too strong so it would be best to keep quiet - at least until after Book 7 is published and b) it would be embarassing for her to find she was being corrected on canon by LOONs, and we know she is prone to the odd canon mistake, especially when on-line. K From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Thu Dec 23 11:24:06 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 11:24:06 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries / Dursleys' abuse/Narration In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120470 Laurasia wrote: "By the time we reach OotP the narrator is has less of a presence in the story so we are left with the possibility of using our own judgment and emotional response, not relying so much on the narrator's. Because of this, I would suggest that, at this point in the series, . IMO, by making the narrator slip away we are left alone and are *forced* to engage emotionally with the story and project a bit of ourselves back into it." Del replies: Great post, Laurasia! I just have a little nitpick about that part above, especially when you say that "JKR is actively encouraging people to use their own emotional response to the situation". The fact is, by putting us right inside Harry's head and heart, JKR isn't really leaving us a chance to use *our own* emotional response : we're supposed to go with *Harry's* response. I get the feeling that she really intends us to be angry when Harry is angry, frustrated when he's frustrated, happy when he's happy. This made reading OoP difficult for me at times, because I don't react like Harry, so my own emotional response to events was often very different from Harry's and yet I was supposed to get emotionally involved in his response. It wasn't so much like that in the previous books. Because the narrator was more telling the story, I felt more free to respond like Harry or not. I was *told* about how he reacted, but I didn't somehow feel forced to *feel* like him. I'm not sure I'm making much sense, sorry. Del From houseofbohacek at earthlink.net Thu Dec 23 12:30:10 2004 From: houseofbohacek at earthlink.net (klyanthea) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 12:30:10 -0000 Subject: (FILK) Bryce Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120471 Bryce A filk by Gail B. to the tune of _Boys_ by the Beatles A Midi is here: http://www.geocities.com/SunsetStrip/Studio/7779/beatle01.html GoF, Chapter One The Riddle's Cook (Patrons at the Hanged Man pub): The police think that they've found the one Who slew the Riddles and their son Hey, hey (bop shuop, m'bop bop shuop) Hey, hey (bop shuop, m'bop bop shuop) Hey, hey (bop shuop) Yeah, they say they do (bop shuop) The police say the murderer It was the Riddle's gardener Hey, hey (bop shuop, m'bop bop shuop) Hey, hey (bop shuop, m'bop bop shuop) Hey, hey (bop shuop) Yeah, I think it's true. (Bop shuop) I am talking about Bryce (yeah yeah, Bryce) Never liked to mix, Bryce (yeah yeah, Bryce) Well, let's talk about Bryce, now (yeah yeah, Bryce) Aaahhh, Bryce, (yeah yeah, Bryce) An unfriendly one, Bryce, now, (yeah yeah, Bryce) Cold, to be precise! (Told ya, Dot!) (guitar solo) There's no doubt in my mind that he did Knew where the back door key was hid (ahhh) Hey, hey (bop shuop, m'bop bop shuop) Hey, hey (bop shuop, m'bop bop shuop) Hey, hey (bop shuop) Yeah, I say he knew (Bop shuop) Well, let's talk about Bryce, (yeah yeah, Bryce) Had a hard war, Frank Bryce, (yeah yeah, Bryce) Well, he'll pay the price, now, (yeah yeah, Bryce) Aaahhhhh! Bryce (yeah yeah, Bryce) Has a temper that Bryce, now, (yeah yeah, boys) And a heart cold as ice! (yeah, yeah) Bryce (yeah yeah, Bryce) Don't mess 'round with Bryce, (yeah yeah, Bryce) Oooh! Bryce (yeah yeah, Bryce) Ahhhhhh! (yeah yeah, Bryce) Well, let's talk about Bryce, now, (yeah yeah, Bryce) He is not very nice! (yeah, yeah) (fade) -Gail B. From willsonkmom at msn.com Thu Dec 23 13:31:38 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 13:31:38 -0000 Subject: Application for Head of House In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120472 > Tammy replies: > > Going through a list of the staff, here's what I came up with: > Examining the current staff doesn't really leave too many options, I think... > > Current Staff: > >snip > Prof. Grubbly-Plank - Somehow she strikes me as a Hufflepuff, or > possibly a Ravenclaw. She's competent as a teacher, but I'd sooner see her getting a fulltime teaching position than head of House. Potioncat: I think Ravenclaw as well. Keep in mind, the Heads are fulltime teachers. >Tammy: > Prof. Sinistra & Prof. Vector - Not often mentioned, but could come > into a larger role yet I suppose. Potioncat: Just on the sound of the name, I'd bet Sinistra is Slytherin. Keeping with JKR's use of sinister sounding names for that house. >Tammy: > Then of course there are the "non-teaching staff," who could possibly still be Head of House, right? Who says Head of House actually has to be a teacher, it could be one of the other staff members. > > Madam Pince - not really mentioned too much, I'd see her as a > Ravenclaw though, being a librarian and all, or a Slytherin, since > she's apparently mean. Potioncat: Not that I really know, but I think a Head would have to be a teacher. I don't think Madam Pince is a Ravenclaw because she doesn't really want the kids using the books. A Ravenclaw librarian would be more encouraging and helpful. >Tammy > Madam Hooch - If she's brave enough to be a Quidditch Ref, she's > probably a Gryffindor, I'd say. She'd be cool to see as Head of House > too, would she still be an impartial referee? > > Madam Pomfrey - Honestly I've no clue what house Madam Pomfrey would have been in. I'd say she's probably a little too busy nursing > students to actually be Head of House though. Potioncat: I'm going with Gryffindor for Hooch because that's where I think JKR would put her. She seems the Gryffindor type. Pomfrey is interesting because I'm not sure where JKR and I differ on the House traits or on medical stereotypes. If ambition and skill drove her to be the Mediwitch in charge then she could be a Slytherin. (Here of course I'm looking at my view of outstanding nurse practitioners in the U.S.) and of course taking the view that not all Slytherins are bad. On the other hand, she could be Hufflepuff, because she is a hard worker. (And I don't think Hufflepuffs are Duffers.) I can't give really good reasons why, but I don't think Gryffindor or Ravenclaw. >Tammy: > I'd say it's most likely that people from outside Hogwarts would come in as Head of House/s, perhaps Lupin returning, Moody, or even Madam Maxim. Kingsley would be a lovely Head of House, but who'd want to stop being an Auror to be a teacher? Potioncat: I'll bet Kingsley is Gryffindor. He could come in if he were injured enough that he couldn't continue as auror. (Shaded of To Serve Them All My Days) He'd be good too! Of course all this speculation would assume someone in the Head of House position has to move out and a new one is needed for the plot. From sevenhundredandthirteen at yahoo.com Thu Dec 23 13:50:43 2004 From: sevenhundredandthirteen at yahoo.com (sevenhundredandthirteen) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 13:50:43 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries / Dursleys' abuse/Narration In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120473 Del: Great post, Laurasia! Laurasia: Thanks! Del: The fact is, by putting us right inside Harry's head and heart, JKR isn't really leaving us a chance to use *our own* emotional response : we're supposed to go with *Harry's* response. I get the feeling that she really intends us to be angry when Harry is angry, frustrated when he's frustrated, happy when he's happy. Laurasia: I think what I meant was that there is only one level of mediation- the events through the eyes of the character, instead of the additional layer through the eyes of the narrator on top of that. (And if we read about what JKR says we have another layer of mediation - that of the author - standing between us and the events.) My point was that by getting rid of the narrator's point of view the emotional response JKR intends isn't reaffirmed multiple times. Just once; by the recounting of events as Harry sees them. IMO, this means that there is *more* opportunity to project your own emotional response onto the events. (How much space there was in the first place is debateable.) I think it's far easier to disagree with/question a character than an omniscient narrator. I think there is less chance of questioning the events of PS than OotP. I understand that Dursleys in book 5 may be cruel. But in PS they are absurd- Vernon rips out *half of his moustache*. Vernon's rage is not cruel when Harry and the narrator are both giggling about how stupid Vernon looked with only half his moustache. Vernon's rage is not cruel when the narrator says he backs down "at the risk of being speared on the end of a pink umbrella by a giant" who has just asked for tea and cooked a few sausages. Del wrote: It wasn't so much like that in the previous books. Because the narrator was more telling the story, I felt more free to respond like Harry or not. I was *told* about how he reacted, but I didn't somehow feel forced to *feel* like him. Laurasia: A good point. When there is the narrator as a buffer/mediator between reader and character you don't so feel obligated to respond exactly as the character does. I think there is a difference between what character point of view asks us to do- empathise with a situation, and what a third party narrator asks us to do- judge the situation. If you can't empathise with a character, I think that's just bad writing. If you have to make up your own mind about whether something is tragic or hilarious or both, that's just the author asking you to think. ~<(Laurasia)>~ From klevasseur at earthlink.net Thu Dec 23 13:38:00 2004 From: klevasseur at earthlink.net (ms_luna_knows) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 13:38:00 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries / Dursleys' abuse In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120474 --> Ms. Luna wrote: > "Okay, I take your point about not directly from Harry's eyes do we > see everything, but most of Harry's own story is from Harry's > perspective." > > Del replies: > The story is told from his perspective, yes, but not *by* him. The > narrator is like some kind of ghost living right inside Harry and > telling his story, but he is not Harry. > Luna, I completely agree with you on this, ..the "ghost living right inside Harry" is how I have come to understand where the narrator is "living" from our discussion. > Ms. Luna wrote: > "So, yes, there is a narrator telling the story, but it IS from > Harry's perspective, and as Harry grows and changes, so to must the > style of narration." > > Del replies: > Why? The style of narration is the narrator's only, it doesn't *have* > to be influenced by the story he is relating at all. Usually, an > invisible narrator like the one in HP remains strictly consistent from > the beginning to the end of a book or series, no matter what happens. > > Del Luna, As Harry changes so does his perspective. The narration needs to change to keep up with Harry's change in mood. I've said before that the teenage mind is a dark and scary thing (especially to us parents!!) and to have the narration not change would, IMO, would be detremental to the story. The HP series is a coming of age, and the style of narration must change to match Harry's changes and moods for us to completely understand where Harry is coming from. Having the story spoken from the same place as the first book, where the narrator was speaking of/about/for a child of 11, would not work for the angst filled 13+ year old. From timregan at microsoft.com Thu Dec 23 14:03:52 2004 From: timregan at microsoft.com (Tim Regan) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 14:03:52 -0000 Subject: Is yours limp or firm? (was Re: Will Viktor Krum be one of the deaths ...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120475 Hi All, No, this isn't spam offering cheap Viagra, it's a post about handshakes in the HP books. Way back in post 115500 Alshain asked ... >>> Has anyone ever made a list about the people who Harry has shaken hands with? I have this little pet hypothesis that the handshakes are code for "Don't forget this person, you'll see them again." <<< Right, my LOON subscription is overdue so here are all the handshakes I can find, prefix by book number and chapter number. 1, 4 Hagrid : Harry 1, 5 Unknown in TLC : Harry 1, 5 Doris Crockford : Harry 1, 5 Quirrell : Harry 1, 5 Doris Crockford : Harry 1, 6 Draco : Harry (failed) 1, 7 several Ravenclaws : Terry Boot 1, 7 Percy : Harry 1, 15 Harry and Hermione : Charlie and his colleagues 1, 15 Hagrid : Ronan 2, 4 Lockhart : Harry 2, 10 Flint : Wood 2, 15 Ernie MacMillan : Harry 3, 3 Fudge : Harry 3, 9 Diggory : Wood 3, 13 Wood : Roger Davies 3, 15 Flint : Wood 3, 22 Dumbledore : Lupin 4, 5 Charlie : Harry 4, 5 Bill : Harry 4, 8 Fudge : Harry 4, 8 The Bulgarian team : the Bulgarian minister for Sport and Fudge 4, 13 Muggle policeman : Mad-eye Moody (failed) 4, 15 Karkaroff : Dumbledore 4, 36 Sirius : Snape 4, 37 Krum : Harry 5, 3 Lupin : Harry 5, 19 Angelina : Montague 5, 23 Arthur : Harry This gives us a list of: Arthur, Bill, Charlie, Charlie's colleagues, Doris Crockford, Draco (failed), Ernie MacMillan, Fudge, Hagrid, Krum, Lockhart, Lupin, Percy, Quirrell, unnamed TLC witch/wizard as all the witches or wizards who have tried to shake Harry's hand. Anyone see a connection or an omen? Here's the full list of quotes: 1, 4 "True, I haven't introduced meself. Rubeus Hagrid, Keeper of Keys and Grounds at Hogwarts." He held out an enormous hand and shook Harry's whole arm. Hagrid : Harry 1, 5 "Always wanted to shake your hand -- I'm all of a flutter." ?? : Harry 1, 5 "He remembers!" cried Dedalus Diggle, looking around at everyone. "Did you hear that? He remembers me!" Harry shook hands again and again -- Doris Crockford kept coming back for more. Doris Crockford : Harry 1, 5 A pale young man made his way forward, very nervously. One of his eyes was twitching. "Professor Quirrell!" said Hagrid. "Harry, Professor Quirrell will be one of your teachers at Hogwarts." "P-P-Potter," stammered Professor Quirrell, grasping Harry's hand, "c-can't t-tell you how p- pleased I am to meet you." Quirrell : Harry 1, 5 "Must get on -- lots ter buy. Come on, Harry." Doris Crockford shook Harry's hand one last time, and Hagrid led them through the bar and out into a small, walled courtyard, where there was nothing but a trash can and a few weeds. Doris Crockford : Harry 1, 6 He turned back to Harry. "You'll soon find out some wizarding families are much better than others, Potter. You don't want to go making friends with the wrong sort. I can help you there." He held out his hand to shake Harry's, but Harry didn't take it. Draco : Harry (failed) 1, 7 "Boot, Terry!" "RAVENCLAW!" The table second from the left clapped this time; several Ravenclaws stood up to shake hands with Terry as he joined them. ???s : Terry Boot 1, 7 Harry heard the hat shout the last word to the whole hall. He took off the hat and walked shakily toward the Gryffindor table. He was so relieved to have been chosen and not put in Slytherin, he hardly noticed that he was getting the loudest cheer yet. Percy the Prefect got up and shook his hand vigorously, while the Weasley twins yelled, "We got Potter! We got Potter!" Percy : Harry 1, 15 Charlie's friends were a cheery lot. They showed Harry and Hermione the harness they'd rigged up, so they could suspend Norbert between them. They all helped buckle Norbert safely into it and then Harry and Hermione shook hands with the others and thanked them very much. Harry and Hermione : Charlie and his colleagues 1, 15 "Oh, it's you, Ronan," said Hagrid in relief. "How are yeh?" He walked forward and shook the centaur's hand. "Good evening to you, Hagrid," said Ronan. He had a deep, sorrowful voice. "Were you going to shoot me?" Hagrid : Ronan 2, 4 The crowd parted, whispering excitedly; Lockhart dived forward, seized Harry's arm, and pulled him to the front. The crowd burst into applause. Harry's face burned as Lockhart shook his hand for the photographer, who was clicking away madly, wafting thick smoke over the Weasleys. Lockhart : Harry 2, 10 As they walked out onto the pitch, a roar of noise greeted them; mainly cheers, because Ravenclaw and Hufflepuff were anxious to see Slytherin beaten, but the Slytherins in the crowd made their boos and hisses heard, too. Madam Hooch, the Quidditch teacher, asked Flint and Wood to shake hands, which they did, giving each other threatening stares and gripping rather harder than was necessary. Flint : Wood 2, 15 Professor Sprout set them all to work pruning the Abyssinian Shrivelfigs. Harry went to tip an armful of withered stalks onto the compost heap and found himself face-to-face with Ernie Macmillan. Ernie took a deep breath and said, very formally, "I just want to say, Harry, that I'm sorry I ever suspected you. I know you'd never attack Hermione Granger, and I apologize for all the stuff I said. We're all in the same boat now, and, well -" He held out a pudgy hand, and Harry shook it. Ernie MacMillan : Harry 3, 3 And with a last smile and shake of Harry's hand, Fudge left the room. Tom now moved forward, beaming at Harry. Fudge : Harry 3, 9 The Hufflepuffs were approaching from the opposite side of the field, wearing canary-yellow robes. The Captains walked up to each other and shook hands; Diggory smiled at Wood but Wood looked as though he had lockjaw and merely nodded. Diggory : Wood 3, 13 "Wood, Davies, shake hands," Madam Hooch said briskly, and Wood shook hands with the Ravenclaw Captain. Wood : Roger Davies 3, 15 "Captains, shake hands!" said Madam Hooch. Flint and Wood approached each other and grasped each other's hand very tightly; it looked as though each was trying to break the other's fingers. Flint : Wood 3, 22 "Good-bye, then, Remus," said Dumbledore soberly. Lupin shifted the grindylow tank slightly so that he and Dumbledore could shake hands. Then, with a final nod to Harry and a swift smile, Lupin left the office. Dumbledore : Lupin 4, 5 Harry had never seen before, though he knew immediately who they must be: Bill and Charlie, the two eldest Weasley brothers. "How're you doing, Harry?" said the nearer of the two, grinning at him and holding out a large hand, which Harry shook, feeling calluses and blisters under his fingers. This had to be Charlie, who worked with dragons in Romania. Charlie : Harry 4, 5 Bill got to his feet, smiling, and also shook Harry's hand. Bill : Harry 4, 8 They had met before, and Fudge shook Harry's hand in a fatherly fashion, asked how he was, and introduced him to the wizards on either side of him. Fudge : Harry 4, 8 One by one, the Bulgarians filed between the rows of seats in the box, and Bagman called out the name of each as they shook hands with their own minister and then with Fudge. The Bulgarian team : the Bulgarian minister for Sport and Fudge 4, 13 Arnold Weasley, who was charged with possession of a flying car two years ago, was yesterday involved in a tussle with several Muggle law-keepers ("policemen") over a number of highly aggressive dustbins. Mr. Weasley appears to have rushed to the aid of "Mad-Eye" Moody, the aged ex-Auror who retired from the Ministry when no longer able to tell the difference between a handshake and attempted murder. Muggle policeman : Mad-eye Moody (failed) 4, 15 "Blooming, thank you, Professor Karkaroff," Dumbledore replied. Karkaroff had a fruity, unctuous voice; when he stepped into the light pouring from the front doors of the castle they saw that he was tall and thin like Dumbledore, but his white hair was short, and his goatee (finishing in a small curl) did not entirely hide his rather weak chin. When he reached Dumbledore, he shook hands with both of his own. Karkaroff : Dumbledore 4, 36 "I will settle, in the short term," said Dumbledore, with a bite of impatience in his voice, "for a lack of open hostility. You will shake hands. You are on the same side now. Time is short, and unless the few of us who know the truth do not stand united, there is no hope for any us. Very slowly - but still glaring at each other as though each wished the other nothing but ill - Sirius and Snape moved toward each other and shook hands. They let go extremely quickly. Sirius : Snape 4, 37 Krum shrugged. He held out his hand as Fleur had done, shook Harry's hand, and then Ron's. Ron looked as though he was suffering some sort of painful internal struggle. Krum had already started walking away when Ron burst out, "Can I have your autograph?" Krum : Harry 5, 3 'Never you mind, you just keep your wand out of your back pocket!' growled Mad-Eye. 'Elementary wand-safety, nobody bothers about it any more.' He stumped off towards the kitchen. 'And I saw that,' he added irritably, as the woman rolled her eyes towards the ceiling. Lupin held out his hand and shook Harry's. 'How are you?' he asked, looking closely at Harry. Lupin : Harry 5, 19 'Captains, shake hands,' ordered the referee Madam Hooch, as Angelina and Montague reached each other. Harry could tell that Montague was trying to crush Angelina's fingers, though she did not wince. 'Mount your brooms . . .' Angelina : Montague 5, 23 Mrs Weasley did not seem entirely satisfied with Mr Weasley's answer. As her husband leaned over to shake Harry's hand, she peered at the bandaging under his nightshirt. Arthur : Harry Cheers, Dumbledad. From drliss at comcast.net Thu Dec 23 13:36:09 2004 From: drliss at comcast.net (drliss at comcast.net) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 13:36:09 +0000 Subject: Snape at Goodric's Hollow Message-ID: <122320041336.20223.41CAC9C90003947000004EFF22007589429C9C07049D0B@comcast.net> No: HPFGUIDX 120476 Sherry: If this was the case, then it seems Snape would have known that Peter was the traitor, and it would make his treatment of Sirius in POA despicable, planning to send an innocent man to be kissed by the dementors? Remember, Snape couldn't have known where the potters were unless the secret keeper revealed it. If he knew they were in danger, and he knew where they were, then he knew Peter was the spy. Even for those who ascribe to the ESE Sirius theory--which I do not--Snape has never said anything to indicate he knows it from personal knowledge. My mixed feelings about Snape would make me love to have him be the one trying to warn the Potters, but I just don't see how he could have. if you can, please clarify Lissa: Actually, this theory hit me like a ton of bricks and even if it's NOT JKR posting, it strikes me as RIGHT. In GoF, we learn that the Death Eaters wear masks, so they don't even know who is in the ranks. If Pettigrew knew Snape was in the Death Eaters (recognizable by voice?), then he probably avoided him as much as possible, based solely on dislike and paranoia. Snape may not have paid any attention to Pettigrew, either. When Pettigrew made his report to Voldie, he was likely in full Death Eater garb. Snape may have heard it (or overheard it) then, or had the information passed on to him by another Death Eater. (How you could confuse Pettigrew for Black still confuses me, given that Peter seems to be much shorter and pudgier, but hey.) But in PoA, Snape still seems to believe that Sirius is the spy, when he yells at Harry that he'll die like his father, arrogant and believing in Black. (Is that PoA?) Snape then runs to the Potters, tries to explain. The bit about James not believing him rings incredibly true to me- it sounds too realistic and fits JKR's themes too well. (Which is sad from Lupin's pov, because it does mean that James probably believed him to be the spy up until the minute of his death. But we knew that anyway.) Voldemort arrives, and Snape pretends that he's still on Voldie's side, or openly defies him and Voldie says he'll deal with him later. Snape is the one who orders Lily to step aside. Etc. Because Dumbledore says that Black was the Secret Keeper, and then the events that occur the next day, Snape believes it. Heck- Remus believes it, so why shouldn't Snape? Dumbleodore's word is law. So when Sirius escapes, Snape still does believe the true spy has escaped. That would definitely explain why Snape hates Harry (I would too, and frankly, would think that Snape is pretty justified in his hatred of James!), and why Dumbledore trusts him completely. (He'd HAVE to truly have changed to want to save James, of all people.) Lissa [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From headlesshunt at hotmail.com Thu Dec 23 13:58:03 2004 From: headlesshunt at hotmail.com (headlesshunt) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 13:58:03 -0000 Subject: Hermione In Trouble? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120477 Morning everyone, I've been pondering this for a while now, and I'm a little worried for our girl Hermione. I think she could be in for big trouble - she's made a lot of enemies, more so, I think, than even Harry. First (that I can think of) was Rita Skeeter, then in OoTP, was Umbridge (who she led into the forest - surely for her destruction at the hand of the centaurs), then the centaurs themselves. Surely we'll see some kind of repurcussions for Hermione in HBP. Do you think that she is "marked" in her own way now? Thoughts anyone? -K From jennifer_maccherone at yahoo.com Thu Dec 23 14:03:57 2004 From: jennifer_maccherone at yahoo.com (nifferhpfan) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 14:03:57 -0000 Subject: Butterflies (Was Re: This one is interesting from mooseming) In-Reply-To: <20041223020750.18588.qmail@web53501.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120478 > Niffer: > Now that Harry is over Cho it is less likely that she will be in a > position to hurt him. Maybe it is Parvati that will change colors > and betray him? > moonmyyst: > Do you mean in a SHIP kind of way or by way of the D.A.? Niffer: There may be a little romance between them, but the betrayal, I think, would need to be bigger than a romantic one if JKR is giving a clue about it. Maybe she will have the power to betray him if he is attracted to her. From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Thu Dec 23 14:34:06 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 14:34:06 -0000 Subject: Did Snape Try to Warn James at GH? (Re: Here is an interesting Snape one) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120479 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jen Reese" wrote: > > Mooseming: > > > So what if Snape came to warn the Potters and James didn't > > > believe him, not because he was too arrogant but because he > > > couldn't see that Snape had the capability to change. James is > > > then partly responsible for Lily's and his own death because he > > > like Snape couldn't move on and believe in people. > > Jen: Whether Mooseming is JKR or not, this is the best explanation > I've seen for why Snape hated James and hates Harry even more. If he > stuck his neck out to save James that night at GH, gave up his cover > and risked his own life, and James laughed in his face or refused to > believe him or even attempted to curse/hex him.....whoo, boy, I > can't see Snape ever forgetting or forgiving that. > Kneasy: Interesting. Both the current speculation as to Moosemings identity and the events at GH. Certainly posters have speculated that there was someone else at GH (usually the finger points at Lupin, though Sevvy is second favourite) I can't recall ever reading a truly convincing theory as to why. This one would certainly work in plot terms, matching known or suspected character traits to the action - though there's one little question that Mooseming doesn't address - who gave Snape the Potters location? Sirius or Peter? And did that person know why Snape wanted to see the Potters? Oh, yes. High potential for plot thickening here. > Jen: But first he has to find out about Snape. I'm not sure Harry's > in any mood to have a nice chat with Snape. Will DD finally spill > the beans? There's no way Harry can make this critical choice > without all the information as we found out in OOTP. There's no > Black in the way now to muck things up or blame things on. > > Ron seems to be the one in the Trio who has the most child-like > moral reasoning good/evil--Snape can't change, once you've gone bad > you can never be redeemed. Hermione puts her faith in Dumbledore, a > more mature response but one based on a decision outside herself. > Harry is the one with the moral dilemma, the choice to make inside > himself about Snape--has Snape truly changed and can Harry in turn > change his view of Snape? > Kneasy: We may see it as a moral dilemma, not sure Harry will. After 5 years of hating Snape's guts the possibility that he (Harry) may be wrong, not just about Snape but perhaps about Sirius too, is gonna be a bombshell. Much of what he considers as fact goes straight down the pan. Re-adjustment would be difficult and probably never complete. Still, he can always act the way Sirius did towards Snape at the end of GoF - limited trust in place of outright antipathy. I doubt that'll bother Snape at all; so long as Voldy goes down he'd do a deal with Salazar himself. Of course, if it goes the way of some predictions made over the past few days and DD isn't around to act as mediator..... Hmm. Nice cliff-hanger to lead into book 7. From coriolan at worldnet.att.net Thu Dec 23 14:57:19 2004 From: coriolan at worldnet.att.net (coriolan_cmc) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 14:57:19 -0000 Subject: FILK: The Sixteenth Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120480 The Sixteenth To the tune of You're Sixteen ? first sung by Johnny Burnette in the late 50s, most famously recorded by Ringo Starr. http://pop.mididb.com/ringostarr/ Dedicated to Gail We'll all show up at Barnes for Rowling's yarns Joy will be unconfined The 16th, it's beautiful, we're in line There'll be geezers and girls `cross the whole world Dressed in robes they designed The 16th, it's beautiful, we're in line He's our Harry, facing threat He's still the boy Voldy wants to get When we get home, we'll be sleepy But we'll stay up for H-B-P. In the early a.m., they'll start selling them With Rowling's name on the spine The 16th, it's beautiful, we're in line We last saw him at King's Cross We've been forlorn and at quite a loss But then we solved all of Jo's hints Ooh, she's finished the Half-Blood Prince We'll be reading all night, in fear and delight Then we'll go argue on-line The 16th, it's beautiful, we're in line. - CMC HARRY POTTER FILKS http://home.att.net/~coriolan/hpfilks.htm From moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 23 15:14:11 2004 From: moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com (K G) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 07:14:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Snape at Godrics Hollow In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041223151411.60726.qmail@web53508.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120481 Brenda wrote: Luckdragon: I have been posting the unpopular theory that the Potters were in possession of the P/S stone at the time of their demise. Have you read much on Jo's site? One of the things that you get (I forget which puzzle you have to solve) is an alternate chapter for PS/SS. In it is the part where they are discussing the stone. IIRC, they are discussing Harry's parents being in possession of the stone. moonmyyst --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From klevasseur at earthlink.net Thu Dec 23 14:11:51 2004 From: klevasseur at earthlink.net (ms_luna_knows) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 14:11:51 -0000 Subject: Snape at Godrics Hollow In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120482 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Brenda" wrote: > > Luckdragon: > I have been posting the unpopular theory that the Potters were in > possession of the P/S stone at the time of their demise. If > Snape was there to warn the Potters it would make perfect sense that > he would have collected the stone and taken it to Dumbledore. > Either before or after Hagrid collected Harry Snape would have snuck > in and retrieved the stone. Ms. Luna: If Snape snuck in and retrieved the stone, why wouldn't he have also taken Harry? If Snape really wanted to prove himself to DD, he would have collected both the stone and Harry. From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Thu Dec 23 15:26:37 2004 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 15:26:37 -0000 Subject: Snape at Godrics Hollow In-Reply-To: <20041223063239.38082.qmail@web52008.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120483 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Bee Chase wrote: > > > Luckdragon: > > I think things would have happened quite quickly. > > Sirius tells James to make Peter secret keeper, not knowing Peter is a traitor. > > Peter runs off to tell Voldemort (Snape listens in) > > Snape races off to warn the Potter's while Voldemort finishes talking to Peter and makes his own way to GH. > > The Potters do not believe Snape. It is good friend Pettidrew vs. nemesis Snape. > > Snape gets out just prior to Voldemorts arrival. > Hickengruendler: I think this were possible, if not for two points. When Snape found them, James and Lily must have known that Peter has betrayed them or at least has told somebody where they are hidding. Otherwise Snape couldn't have found them, and the Potters knew this. The second point is, that if Snape overheard Peter telling Voldemort, than he must have known that Peter was the betrayer and not Sirius. Therefore he let Sirius rot in Azkaban for years, although he knew that Sirius was innocent. And later he caught him again and wanted to sent bring him back to the Dementors, eagerly awaiting his execution (which really is bad enough, even if he thought Sirius to be guilty). I wouldn't put this completely past Snape, seeing how much he hates Sirius, but IMO it would definitely destroy any possibility of him being redeemable. From stevejjen at earthlink.net Thu Dec 23 15:21:44 2004 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 15:21:44 -0000 Subject: Did Snape Try to Warn James at GH? (Re: Here is an interesting Snape one) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120484 Kneasy: > Certainly posters have speculated that there was someone else at GH > (usually the finger points at Lupin, though Sevvy is second > favourite) I can't recall ever reading a truly convincing theory > as to why. > This one would certainly work in plot terms, matching known or > suspected character traits to the action - though there's one > little question that Mooseming doesn't address - who gave Snape > the Potters location? > > Sirius or Peter? And did that person know why Snape wanted to see > the Potters? Oh, yes. High potential for plot thickening here. Jen: That is the question. Here's my guess. Snape was the eavesdropper in the Hog's Head. He has no idea who the prophecy is about, just a child to be born as the seventh month dies. He takes the info back to LV, who churns through all the possible children being born and discovers the possiblities are Harry and Neville. Now suddenly Snape has some conflict. Sure he hates Potter and Black, would love to see them dead, but he also has the life debt. That's the little leak in the balloon that starts the process of Snape leaving Voldemort. Snape, being the only person who knows of the prophecy in the DE's, is second-in-command on this mission. He starts coming to Dumbledore with information as well, using his Occlumency to keep LV at bay. When Peter is made SK and spills the beans, Snape is in on that conversation. Peter has no clue about the propehcy and Snape has no clue what LV is planning, but all three are involved. Once Snape figures out "how far Voldemort is willing to go," he blanches, makes some excuse and runs to the Potter home and makes a futile attempt to warn the Potters that Voldemort is on the way. With that failure, Snape carries around not only the life debt to the dead man and perhaps a woman he didn't totally hate, but the knowledge he's indirectly the reason Neville & Harry have no parents. In true Snape fashion, that causes Snape not to bend over backward trying to atone to Harry and Neville for his mistake, but to push them away as severely as he can with harshness and anger. They are, after all, the living reminder of his failures. Oh, the ramifications are endless and conflicted for Snape. He just keeps making it worse for himself. Jen From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu Dec 23 15:28:36 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 15:28:36 -0000 Subject: Do Dobby & Lucius know the prophecy? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120485 I'm listening to Jim Dale's reading of CoS with my kids, and for some reason Dobby's comment to Harry at Privet Drive stuck out to me more than on past readings: "No, no, no," squeaked Dobby, shaking his head so hard his ears flapped. "Harry Potter must stay where he is safe. He is too great, too good, to lose." [US hardback, p. 16] I realize this could just be his commenting on what Harry had *already done*, at Godric's Hollow. But somehow it seems to "hold more," if you know what I mean? Then there's how Lucius always seems to know so much more than he ought to. [Why would HE know Sirius' capability of becoming a black dog animagi, for instance?] Anyway, whether because there's a spy reporting to him or because *he* overheard the first part of Trelawney's prophecy, does Lucius KNOW what the prophecy says? Or at least the first part? Does Dobby, too, from things overheard at Malfoy Manor? Or have I gone nuts from spending too much time with the kids on school vacation already? :-| Siriusly Snapey Susan From neferiet at yahoo.com Thu Dec 23 14:26:27 2004 From: neferiet at yahoo.com (Cindi H) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 06:26:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: Snape at Goodric's Hollow / Sirius - Peter SK switch In-Reply-To: <122320041336.20223.41CAC9C90003947000004EFF22007589429C9C07049D0B@comcast.net> Message-ID: <20041223142627.63579.qmail@web41804.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120486 Lissa: > > But in PoA, Snape still seems to believe that Sirius is the spy, when he > yells at Harry that he'll die like his father, arrogant and believing in > Black. (Is that PoA?) > > Snape then runs to the Potters, tries to explain. The bit about James > not believing him rings incredibly true to me- it sounds too realistic > and fits JKR's themes too well. > > Because Dumbledore says that Black was the Secret Keeper, and then the > events that occur the next day, Snape believes it. Heck- Remus believes > it, so why shouldn't Snape? Dumbleodore's word is law. So when Sirius > escapes, Snape still does believe the true spy has escaped. Cindi H: Do you think maybe that Sirius and Peter switched places (secret keeper) and did NOT tell the Potters? Sirius certainly did not tell DD since he testified that Sirius was the Potter's secret keeper, so Snape may have overheard VM planning to kill the Potters. Snape would still assume it was Sirius who betrayed them (but not hearing the actual betrayal to VM) and not knowing that Sirius and Peter switched places. Only Sirius and Peter knew of the switch. Therefore, James would not believe Snape if he came to warn him (to repay his life debt to James). James knew that his best friend, Sirius, as secret keeper, would never betray him. But James, still holding a grude against Snape, was too arrogant to believe that Snape would warn him of the serious (pun) impending attack. I think James was killed right away as soon as VM arrived. The voice heard by Harry was Snape's telling Lily to take Harry and he would hold off VM. This would still coincide with the priori incantatem that James came out of VM's wand after Lily. From stbjohn2 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 23 15:38:15 2004 From: stbjohn2 at yahoo.com (stbjohn2) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 15:38:15 -0000 Subject: So, children series or not? In-Reply-To: <20041223001534.75543.qmail@web60007.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120487 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Mari Lea wrote: > > Alla wrote: > > I went to preorder the book to bn.com and on the > > advertisement page it still says age range 9-12. > > > > Do you think it somehow supports the idea that > > JKR orients the books towards the younger audience? > > Do you think it is only publishers' opinion? > > Sandy somewhere (I'm pretty sure it was the A&E bio) I saw JKR's cover letter she sent out with the manuscript when she was seeking a publisher for SS and it specifically gave that age group. It could be that some agent told her that was what to do, I don't know. And her U.S. publisher is Scholastic, which specializes in kids books. The books can be read on many levels by many ages, but for actual reading level, it might not be as high as you think. The AR (Accelerated Reader -- a reading comprehension program they use in schools in the U.S.) level ranges from 5.5 for SS to the upper 6's for the next 3; and 7.2 for OOTP. (as far as I can tell, the reading level is basically grade level, based on median readers for that grade level). In my public library, books 1-3 are shelved as juvenile lit; 4 and 5 as teen lit. My third grader and several classmates have read and passed the tests on several of the books; the best reader in the class has completed all five. (The questions are multiple choice, and I'm sure they don't ask the type of things you'd see here -- "HOw does the veil reflect the Judeo-Christian view of death" or whatever, which is why I say they can be read on many levels, which I think is Jo's ultimate intent.) Elves, please forgive lack of canon. From willsonkmom at msn.com Thu Dec 23 15:44:18 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 15:44:18 -0000 Subject: Snape at Goodric's Hollow / Sirius - Peter SK switch In-Reply-To: <20041223142627.63579.qmail@web41804.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120488 >>Cindi H: I think James was killed right away as soon as VM arrived. The voice heard by Harry was Snape's telling Lily to take Harry and he would hold off VM. This would still coincide with the priori incantatem that James came out of VM's wand after Lily. Potioncat: I snipped too much, probably. I think Snape believed up to OoP, that Black betrayed the Potters. And he either thought Lupin was in on the betrayal or he just doesn't trust werewolves. His comment in the Shrieking Shack does indicate that Snape tried to warn James about Black. I don't think Snape could have been the one defending Lily and Harry at GH because then LV would know Snape had switched sides and his comment at the graveyard would have been very different. From Vivamus at TaprootTech.com Thu Dec 23 15:51:22 2004 From: Vivamus at TaprootTech.com (Vivamus) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 10:51:22 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Did Snape Try to Warn James at GH? (Re: Here is an interesting Snape one) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200412231051143.SM01224@devbox> No: HPFGUIDX 120489 > Kneasy: > Interesting. > Both the current speculation as to Moosemings identity and > the events at GH. > > Certainly posters have speculated that there was someone else > at GH (usually the finger points at Lupin, though Sevvy is > second favourite) I can't recall ever reading a truly > convincing theory as to why. > > This one would certainly work in plot terms, matching known > or suspected character traits to the action - though there's > one little question that Mooseming doesn't address - who gave > Snape the Potters location? > > Sirius or Peter? And did that person know why Snape wanted to > see the Potters? Oh, yes. High potential for plot thickening here. Vivamus: Doesn't the Fidelius charm mean that only the secret keeper can reveal the location? Therefore, if Severus was there, Peter must have chosen to give the location information directly to Snape. Unless you are suggesting Sirius was ESE (which I don't think fits with Peter's confessions in the Shrieking Shack), Peter must have revealed it to Severus. Here are two possibilities for that, neither of which are very satisfactory: 1. LV allows a lieutenant to be there when PP gives the news, or 3. Severus was actually the one to take the information from PP to LV. The first seems unlikely, because LV isn't the type to share critical information -- although it might have happened because PP burst in and spilled the beans in front of others. The only explanation I can think of for the second one is a dead drop scenario. Instead of going all the way to LV, which would be dangerous, PP instead leaves a message for his pickup to take to LV. Since Severus is his pickup, he doesn't actually know who the spy is; he only delivers the messages -- which explains HIS actions at the Shack. But, as he is the intended pickup for the messages, he can read them as well as LV. Perhaps there is some sort of curse or protective charm on the messages, so they can only be brought straight to LV. That would prevent Severus from going to DD until AFTER he had delivered the message. That generates a scenario of 1. PP leaves message for SS 2. SS takes message to LV 3. LV makes plans for attack, while SS sends message to DD 4. SS races to GH and arrives barely ahead of LV This does fit with the speculation from "Jo" about GH. Hmmm, it also makes potential sense of something else. If Severus Snape's first action in switching sides was to stand up to LV in defense of GH, and was forced to flee, LV would know that SS had switched sides. So, the line in the GoF graveyard, "One, who I believe has left me forever ... he will be killed, of course . . . " would also fit that. If SS had been a spy for some time before that, I don't think LV would have been so casual about it. It would have been outright treason and the reason for his downfall, and torturing SS to death would have been the highest thing on LV's mind. But if SS first opposed LV when LV went to kill Lilly and James and their son, that seems different. LV would certainly kill someone who did that, but if Severus' devotion to Lilly was the hook that let LV control him, it would mean that it meant that LV made a mistake in not realizing that was the one place he could not control SS. Hence, the "he will be killed, of course" line instead of "none of you will rest until that miserable treacherous slime, SS, has been hunted down and ... [fill in appropriate things LV would come up with]" Vivamus, who is delighted to have more food for thought over the next six months From willsonkmom at msn.com Thu Dec 23 15:52:54 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 15:52:54 -0000 Subject: So, children series or not? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120490 > Sandy snip The AR (Accelerated Reader -- a reading comprehension program they use in schools in the U.S.) level ranges from 5.5 for SS to the upper 6's for the next 3; and 7.2 for OOTP. (as far as I can tell, the reading level is basically grade level, based on median readers for that grade level). In my public library, books 1-3 are shelved as juvenile lit; 4 and 5 as teen lit. > My third grader and several classmates have read and passed the tests on several of the books; the best reader in the class has completed all five. snip Potioncat: The public library in my area shelves the books in several different areas. But you're saying that those 3rd graders are reading at 5th grade and above and I would agree. I do agree that the books can be read at many different levels. Probably far more than JKR ever imagined. But I'm also sure she put levels into these books. I enjoy reading "The Series of Unfortunate Events" to my youngest and I love the deeper jokes and literary asides...but I can't picture myself on a chat site like this one for it! Potioncat From stevejjen at earthlink.net Thu Dec 23 15:59:08 2004 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 15:59:08 -0000 Subject: Do Dobby & Lucius know the prophecy? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120491 Susan: > "No, no, no," squeaked Dobby, shaking his head so hard his ears > flapped. "Harry Potter must stay where he is safe. He is too > great, too good, to lose." [US hardback, p. 16] > > I realize this could just be his commenting on what Harry had > *already done*, at Godric's Hollow. But somehow it seems to "hold > more," if you know what I mean? > > Then there's how Lucius always seems to know so much more than he > ought to. [Why would HE know Sirius' capability of becoming a black > dog animagi, for instance?] Anyway, whether because there's a spy > reporting to him or because *he* overheard the first part of > Trelawney's prophecy, does Lucius KNOW what the prophecy says? Or > at least the first part? Does Dobby, too, from things overheard at > Malfoy Manor? Jen: I definitely think Lucius knows, possibly via Snape who is my choice as the eavesdropper. Like you said, Lucius seems to know everything. He obviously knew what happened to the Potters in POA (per Draco), that Sirius had "betrayed" them even though that was *not* common knowledge at the time. And I'll just bet he knew why they were betrayed as well. The only thing Lucius didn't seem aware of, or didn't reveal, was Peter being the actual SK. Voldemort's power may be fear and intimidation, but Lucius' strength is definitely his connections. In fact, I'd say Voldemort goes easy on him because he knows Lucius is too valuable to lose *and* because in some twisted way, Lucius is exactly who Tom Riddle wished to be: Wealthy, pure-blood, well-connected, and powerful. Jen From moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 23 16:06:19 2004 From: moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com (K G) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 08:06:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape at Godrics Hollow In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041223160619.49167.qmail@web53501.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120492 > Luckdragon: > > I think things would have happened quite quickly. > > Sirius tells James to make Peter secret keeper, not knowing Peter is a traitor. > > Peter runs off to tell Voldemort (Snape listens in) > > Snape races off to warn the Potter's while Voldemort finishes talking to Peter and makes his own way to GH. > > The Potters do not believe Snape. It is good friend Pettidrew vs. nemesis Snape. > > Snape gets out just prior to Voldemorts arrival. > Hickengruendler: I think this were possible, if not for two points. When Snape found them, James and Lily must have known that Peter has betrayed them or at least has told somebody where they are hidding. Otherwise Snape couldn't have found them, and the Potters knew this. The second point is, that if Snape overheard Peter telling Voldemort, than he must have known that Peter was the betrayer and not Sirius. Therefore he let Sirius rot in Azkaban for years, although he knew that Sirius was innocent. And later he caught him again and wanted to sent bring him back to the Dementors, eagerly awaiting his execution (which really is bad enough, even if he thought Sirius to be guilty). I wouldn't put this completely past Snape, seeing how much he hates Sirius, but IMO it would definitely destroy any possibility of him being redeemable. I was planning on lurking for a while until the List Elves had a couple of egg nogs but so much for early resolutions!! The way I see it, we have come to 2 stumbling blocks. 1) How could Snape not know the difference between tall Sirius and short Pettigrew 2) How could Snape get to James without revealing he knew of GH and thus tip them off about Pettigrew. Here is what I came up with: 1) As mentioned before (forgot who--- sorry) he was probably in full DE garb. Also, how do most of the people speak to LV?? Think of OotP. On their knees. Hunched over, on the floor, with lots of material covering, speaking to the floor, mask over face, possibly trying to alter voice. Could work. 2) Where did James work? James may have thought that the danger was to wife and son. He still felt he should work or at least do Order work and would go out of hiding from time to time. Maybe on a specific errand. Maybe lured out. Remember how antsy Sirius got at GP. Would either of these work with the plot? moonmyyst --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From foxmoth at qnet.com Thu Dec 23 16:39:04 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 16:39:04 -0000 Subject: JKR stands for Just Kidding, Really Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120493 I've claimed that Jo sometimes tries to fool us in her dealings with the fans, for example, by confirming that Wormtail killed Cedric when, as I maintain, there are two characters using that name. I've been challenged to find an example of Jo deliberately misleading her fans, and now we have it. Her Christmas card states that she was just kidding when she said on her website that HBP was racing her third child into the world -- and she admits in her latest news that the book has been complete for a while (she said it was a weighty secret that it was finished.) So, she does fool us, and I stand by my theories: there are two Wormtails, one of whom is ESE!Lupin, and Snape, if he does not have links to vampires now, had them formerly. Pippin whose comprehensive ESE!Lupin essay is racing the Accio deadline From moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 23 17:34:33 2004 From: moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com (K G) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 09:34:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] JKR stands for Just Kidding, Really In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041223173434.2667.qmail@web53505.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120494 I've claimed that Jo sometimes tries to fool us in her dealings with the fans, I've been challenged to find an example of Jo deliberately misleading her fans, and now we have it. Her Christmas card states that she was just kidding when she said on her website that HBP was racing her third child into the world -- and she admits in her latest news that the book has been complete for a while (she said it was a weighty secret that it was finished.) Pippin Do I remember correctly? Didn't she say somewhere (and I am drawing blank where... really need to lay off of the egg nog - not) that book 6 and 7 would for the most part be written simultaneously? I know that we just got the official word for book 6 and I should be greatful for that, but what does everyone think about what that says for book 7? Could that be what she was really refering to when she said that her baby was racing Harry's next adventure? Is she trying to get as much done on book 7 as she can so that she can take a few months off with the baby and not feel guilty? moonmyyst __________________________________________________ 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 bethanycurrie at aol.com Thu Dec 23 17:12:10 2004 From: bethanycurrie at aol.com (curriebethany) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 17:12:10 -0000 Subject: Do Dobby & Lucius know the prophecy? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120495 > > Susan: > > "No, no, no," squeaked Dobby, shaking his head so hard his ears > > flapped. "Harry Potter must stay where he is safe. He is too > > great, too good, to lose." [US hardback, p. 16] > > > > I realize this could just be his commenting on what Harry had > > *already done*, at Godric's Hollow. But somehow it seems to "hold more," if you know what I mean? > > > > Then there's how Lucius always seems to know so much more than he > > ought to. > Jen: I definitely think Lucius knows, possibly via Snape who is my > choice as the eavesdropper. Like you said, Lucius seems to know > everything. Voldemort's power may be fear and intimidation, but Lucius' strength is definitely his connections. Bethany: I've been wondering for awhile why Dobby approached Harry and told him not to go back to school (COS) - why not prevent Ginny from returning to Hogwarts? She is the one with the diary and who becomes possessed and attacks everyone. Tom tells Harry in the Chamber that it wasn't until after Ginny told him about Harry that he changed his target from mudbloods to Harry. How did Dobby know that would happen? As for Lucius, he definitely has the right connections. Lucius is obviously a major player, as he leads the group of DEs into the Ministry of Magic even though others, like Bellatrix LeStrange constantly claim to be LV's most devoted servant. (Shouldn't they lead the attack then?) Snape, trying to play double-agent (I suspect), has to remain friendly with the important DEs. Because Lucius is such a top dog, Snape keeps in touch with Lucius to get information from the DEs about their plans to pass on to the Order (although it makes me wonder why he was kept out of the loop in OOTP when the DEs attack the kids at the Ministry). Thus, Snape constantly kisses up to Draco at school. The friendly relationship between Snape and the Malfoys is explained in COS where Draco mentions Snape would be an excellent Headmaster and his father would recommend Snape to the school board for the position. (Excuse the paraphrasing.) I don't know how much Lucius was personally present to hear (getting back to the prophecy) but I wouldn't be surprised if LV told him about it. After all, what was Lucius talking about at home regarding the diary which caused Dobby to warn Harry? Clearly, LV and Lucius have had plans underway the whole time to kill Harry and bring LV back (remember JKR said that if Tom had escaped the diary and Ginny died, LV would be much more powerful in real life), even if Lucius wasn't out searching for LV himself. -- Bethany From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 23 17:37:55 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 17:37:55 -0000 Subject: So, children series or not? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120496 Potioncat: I do agree that the books can be read at many different levels. Probably far more than JKR ever imagined. But I'm also sure she put levels into these books. Alla: Yes, I do agree that books can be read on many different levels and I doubt that JKR had in mind specific children's ages, but I still think that she had in mind younger audience when she started the books. Maybe she thought that she target audience will start at ten- elven years old and will grew up with the characters, I don't know. What I am not sure is whether she intended to target adult audience when she started (I don't know, over 20 let's say?) I am pretty sure she does now, though. :o) From elsyee_h at yahoo.com Thu Dec 23 17:48:51 2004 From: elsyee_h at yahoo.com (Tammy) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 17:48:51 -0000 Subject: Do Dobby & Lucius know the prophecy? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120497 > > Susan: > > > "No, no, no," squeaked Dobby, shaking his head so hard his ears > > > flapped. "Harry Potter must stay where he is safe. He is too > > > great, too good, to lose." [US hardback, p. 16] > > > > > > I realize this could just be his commenting on what Harry had > > > *already done*, at Godric's Hollow. But somehow it seems > to "hold more," if you know what I mean? > > > > > > Then there's how Lucius always seems to know so much more than he > > > ought to. > > > Jen: I definitely think Lucius knows, possibly via Snape who is my > > choice as the eavesdropper. Like you said, Lucius seems to know > > everything. Voldemort's power may be fear and intimidation, but > Lucius' strength is definitely his connections. > > Bethany: > I've been wondering for awhile why Dobby approached Harry and told > him not to go back to school (COS) - why not prevent Ginny from > returning to Hogwarts? She is the one with the diary and who becomes > possessed and attacks everyone. Tom tells Harry in the Chamber that > it wasn't until after Ginny told him about Harry that he changed his > target from mudbloods to Harry. How did Dobby know that would happen? > *snipped remainder of post* Tammy: IMO, Lucius wasn't specifically after Ginny, but more any of the Weasley children. True, Ginny as the only female would have been the easiest mark for a diary, but I think Lucius would have accepted any Weasley he could get the diary onto. As for Dobby, I think there's still more to that story coming, there are some lovely conspiracy theories revolving around Dobby, I know you're probably all tired of rehashing those - but I for one wouldn't mind a repeat! -Tammy, who so enjoys reading conspiracy theories but can't seem to come up with one of her own. From ibotsjfvxfst at yahoo.co.uk Thu Dec 23 19:28:11 2004 From: ibotsjfvxfst at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?Hans=20Andr=E9a?=) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 19:28:11 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Character Discussion: Lily Message-ID: <20041223192811.77020.qmail@web25102.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120498 Alla: I loved your post and cannot wait for you to explore the symbolism in the other characters. Quick question - so far Lily seems to be personification of sacrificial love of the mother for her son and does not have any flaws, which we know about. What if the next books reveal Lily as much more flawed character than we knew before, do you think your interpretation will still stand? Hans: Many thanks for your encouraging comments. I shall post my thoughts on James tonight. I think it's almost inevitable that Jo will give Lily some flaws. It's precisely Harry's flaws that make us identify with him so much. We love him for his nobility, his courage, his fairness, and his selfless actions, but we, and I'm including many millions of children and adults all over the world, identify with Harry because of the difficulty he's having coping with the pain of bereavement, or with Malfoy's and Snape's constant jibes about Harry's parents and friends, or with his powerlessness against Voldemort and his allies. What Jo is doing is personifying forces that a person, who wants to enter the absolute spiritual centre of his/her being, will meet and have to deal with. In order to personify these forces properly, you have to make them truly human. And to be truly human you have to have flaws! Surely Jo has the world record on getting people to identify with characters in a book? I think if I personally had to point to the one thing that is so special about "Harry Potter" I'd have to say it's the intense way we empathise with Harry. We really get into his skin, don't we? My first book was book 2, and I think I'd already fallen seriously in love with Harry by the end of chapter one. So my answer is, I think Lily will have some flaws, but not enough to damage my theory in any way. Actually I suspect the way Remus talked to Harry about Lily in the film is one of the things that gave Jo "goose bumps". As you know, Remus praised Lily very highly. Perhaps others can help us remember what he said, but one thing that sticks in my memory is him saying something like, "She believed in the best in people even when they didn't believe in it themselves." That fits right in with my theory! Have I answered your question? Once again thanks for your kind response and I hope you enjoy my post about James tonight. ===== Hans Rieuwers see you at Harry Potter for Seekers http://groups.yahoo.com/group/harrypotterforseekers/ ___________________________________________________________ ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From ibotsjfvxfst at yahoo.co.uk Thu Dec 23 19:37:33 2004 From: ibotsjfvxfst at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?Hans=20Andr=E9a?=) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 19:37:33 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Character Discussion: James Message-ID: <20041223193733.94675.qmail@web25110.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120499 This is the second post in a new series to air my theory that Harry Potter is a new version of the timeless message to confront humanity with the alchemical path of liberation. In the first one I discussed Lily as the personification of the eternal principle in the human being. We experience Lily as the voice in the heart that makes us feel special, royal, full of spiritual potential. It also speaks to us as the voice of conscience. I'm not talking about fear of consequences or fear of breaking rules. The conscience I'm talking about is the inner urge to do the right thing morally because of self-respect, or because we just want to do the right thing to other people for its own sake. We just don't want to hurt other people. We know others have their own ineffable worth and we respect that deeply. When we transgress that inner law of the heart it hurts us and we feel remorse. Remorse in its purest form is a deep regret at causing detriment to others, even when they don't know we've done it, and no one else knows. The conscience can be a hard master, as most of us will know. Rejoice, for if you have a conscience and know what remorse is, you know Lily, and have her in your heart. Then you have the potential of going the Path of total Liberation which Harry is walking and which I've described in my essay, "Harry Potter: Christian Rosycross in Jeans", in the Group's files. This voice is fairly passive in most people. It stops them doing the wrong thing rather than prompting them to do the right thing. However there comes a moment when this inner voice becomes active. James is born. James is what turns a person into a seeker. The word "James" comes from the Hebrew name, "Jacob". It means "follower", or "supplanter". James is the active force that supplants the passive voice of the conscience. James is the personification of the force in the human being that makes him actively search for the meaning of life. There is an intuitive feeling that our true destination does not lie in this world and that the latter is illusory and basically cannot satisfy the inner hunger for peace, for goodness, truth and justice. What turns the passive voice into an active one? It's the end product of many incarnations full of disappointment, disillusionment and suffering. It's the subconscious realisation that nothing in this world can really satisfy the inner core of our being. That all our endeavours are just mad rides on the merry go round at Vanity Fair. That's James. James learns to turn himself into a stag, as we all know. The stag is the age old symbol for the thirst for the Water of Life. The word "hart" is sometimes used and I love that because it's so close to the word "heart", where Lily lives and where this thirst comes from. This word is used in the Revised Standard Version of the Bible I read, and Psalm 42 has a fantastic little piece which sums up everything I can say: "As a hart longs for flowing streams, so longs my soul for thee, O God. My soul thirsts for God, for the living God." The Water of Life is the symbol for the original, pure immortal life-force which enters the heart of those who have this longing for it. I'll come back to that later. First I want to briefly discuss Grimm's fairy tale, "The Glass Coffin", because a stag plays an important role there, as I mentioned in my previous post. In this fairy tale the hero wakes up one morning to the sound of a stag and a black bull fighting. The stag wins and lifts our hero up with its prongs (sorry, couldn't resist that) and takes him to a desert (John the Baptist). The stag puts the hero down and he finds a cave with a glass coffin and a miniature castle. The princess (Lily) wakes up and tells the hero what to do. They kiss, everything comes back to life, and they live happily ever after. The symbolism here is extremely clear. The black bull symbolises the force that imprisons us to this universe and the stag our longing for liberation from it. The fight between the two symbolises the many experiences we have through innumerable incarnations until the stag wins. In this fairy tale the stag is the brother of the princess while in Harry Potter they're husband and wife. I'm sure there must be many other stories containing a stag with this symbolic meaning, and perhaps some of you will point these out. Lily and James marry and settle in Godric's Hollow. A hollow is a small valley or dell (as in Rivendell). Godric is a legendary figure who had a pet: guess what. A stag! Harry is born from the union of the lily and the stag. When the heart actively thirsts for the Living Water, its cry is answered and, like a quickening shower after years of drought, an inflow of imperishable life-force touches the heart. This enters the blood and commences its journey through the whole body. Harry is the new, immortal soul, our personal Messiah promised to us since the time of the Fall. The forces which keep us imprisoned in this universe know what happens when a child is born to the lily and the stag, and they try to kill it. The stag dies and the lily sacrifices itself. The forces of imprisonment, personified by Voldemort, are neutralised and incapable of further harm for a long time while the new soul demonstrates its immortality. Of course in real life the immortal, eternal thought-spark in the heart and the longing that emanates from it don't actually die. They live on in the new soul. When the new soul is born within the seeker, it takes over the two roles. It becomes the personification of those two forces: its inherent goodness and its yearning for the Living Water and liberation from this universe. This is why it is said so often that Harry is like his parents. His appearance is almost identical to his father's, except that he has Lily's eyes. Lily's sacrifice is a wonderful symbol of the seeker's relationship to the new soul when it's born. The seeker has to be prepared to sacrifice himself totally to the new soul. This new soul is capable of liberating the entire human being, as Harry shows in the five books published so far. When the new soul has reached a certain maturity it can use the longing for liberation to free itself from the forces imprisoning it on the astral plane. Lupin teaches Harry to invoke the patronus, which is in the form of a stag, as we know. In "Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban" Harry is attacked by 100 dementors. He invokes the stag patronus and this drives them all away. The dementors symbolise the black, demonic forces in the atmosphere and can not only immobilise the new soul, but can even totally suck out its vital energy. However what Harry Potter tells us in this part is that the soul is indestructible as long as it mobilises its longing for the Living Water, for liberation. Another way to put this is to express it in the words of Psalm 121: "I lift up my eyes to the hills. From whence does my help come? My help comes from the Lord". The hills symbolise the spiritual height the seeker attains to and the help is the spiritual power which drives all opposing forces away. What gives the stag the power to drive all evil and opposing forces away? All forces in the astral plane, i.e. all desires and emotions, have a certain frequency of vibration. Obviously selfish and evil feelings have a lower vibration while unselfish, noble ones have a higher one. However the longing for the life-force from the Real World outside our universe is much higher in vibration than any force in this world, and so it is supreme. It's scientifically invincible. That is the message of Harry Potter. Drink the Living Water and you shall return to your divine origins. Hans ===== Hans Rieuwers see you at Harry Potter for Seekers http://groups.yahoo.com/group/harrypotterforseekers/ ___________________________________________________________ ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca Thu Dec 23 20:17:05 2004 From: luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca (Bee Chase) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 15:17:05 -0500 (EST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape at Godrics Hollow In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041223201705.57051.qmail@web52005.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120500 ms_luna_knows wrote: --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Brenda" wrote: > > Luckdragon: > I have been posting the unpopular theory that the Potters were in > possession of the P/S stone at the time of their demise. If > Snape was there to warn the Potters it would make perfect sense that > he would have collected the stone and taken it to Dumbledore. > Either before or after Hagrid collected Harry Snape would have snuck > in and retrieved the stone. Ms. Luna: If Snape snuck in and retrieved the stone, why wouldn't he have also taken Harry? If Snape really wanted to prove himself to DD, he would have collected both the stone and Harry. Luckdragon: Hagrid arrived before he had the chance and Snape not yet sure what exactly had just happened to Lord V waited and was surprised to see first Hagrid who collected Harry, then Sirius who gave H his bike then took off after Peter. Remember there is lots of distrust, deception and confusion. No one can be trusted until Snape is sure Lord V is gone. 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 luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca Thu Dec 23 20:22:03 2004 From: luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca (Bee Chase) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 15:22:03 -0500 (EST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Snape at Godrics Hollow In-Reply-To: <20041223151411.60726.qmail@web53508.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041223202203.44159.qmail@web52001.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120501 K G wrote: Brenda wrote: Luckdragon: I have been posting the unpopular theory that the Potters were in possession of the P/S stone at the time of their demise. Have you read much on Jo's site? One of the things that you get (I forget which puzzle you have to solve) is an alternate chapter for PS/SS. In it is the part where they are discussing the stone. IIRC, they are discussing Harry's parents being in possession of the stone. moonmyyst Luckdragon: Yes! The discarded first chapter of Philosopher stone and the fact that she states on another area of her site that the first chapter of book six is based on a discarded chapter she almost used in books 1 and 2. That is the only word from JKR I have to support my theory. --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] 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 Sponsor Get unlimited calls to U.S./Canada --------------------------------- 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 luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca Thu Dec 23 20:30:05 2004 From: luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca (Bee Chase) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 15:30:05 -0500 (EST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape at Godrics Hollow In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041223203005.34960.qmail@web52003.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120502 hickengruendler wrote: --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Bee Chase wrote: > > > Luckdragon: > > I think things would have happened quite quickly. > > Sirius tells James to make Peter secret keeper, not knowing Peter is a traitor. > > Peter runs off to tell Voldemort (Snape listens in) > > Snape races off to warn the Potter's while Voldemort finishes talking to Peter and makes his own way to GH. > > The Potters do not believe Snape. It is good friend Pettidrew vs. nemesis Snape. > > Snape gets out just prior to Voldemorts arrival. > Hickengruendler: I think this were possible, if not for two points. When Snape found them, James and Lily must have known that Peter has betrayed them or at least has told somebody where they are hidding. Otherwise Snape couldn't have found them, and the Potters knew this. The second point is, that if Snape overheard Peter telling Voldemort, than he must have known that Peter was the betrayer and not Sirius. Therefore he let Sirius rot in Azkaban for years, although he knew that Sirius was innocent. And later he caught him again and wanted to sent bring him back to the Dementors, eagerly awaiting his execution (which really is bad enough, even if he thought Sirius to be guilty). I wouldn't put this completely past Snape, seeing how much he hates Sirius, but IMO it would definitely destroy any possibility of him being redeemable. Luckdragon: Both good points. For the first my answer would be that James hated and distrusted Snape so much he was blind to what was happening and it did not sink in until it was too late. On your second point I posted earlier that Snape may have been informed second hand that the Potters had been found. Either Voldemort himself or possibly Lucius ran into Snape and let out that he was on his way to rid himself of the Potters. 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 nkafkafi at yahoo.com Thu Dec 23 19:38:32 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 19:38:32 -0000 Subject: JKR stands for Just Kidding, Really In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120503 > Pippin wrote: > > I've claimed that Jo sometimes tries to fool us in her dealings > with the fans, for example, by confirming that Wormtail killed > Cedric when, as I maintain, there are two characters using that > name. I've been challenged to find an example of Jo deliberately > misleading her fans, and now we have it. > > Her Christmas card states that she was just kidding when she > said on her website that HBP was racing her third child into the > world -- and she admits in her latest news that the book has > been complete for a while (she said it was a weighty secret that > it was finished.) > > So, she does fool us, and I stand by my theories: there are two > Wormtails, one of whom is ESE!Lupin, and Snape, if he does not > have links to vampires now, had them formerly. Neri: I'd think that there's a difference between fooling us about a question like when was HBP finished, and fooling us regarding the plot. Especially since JKR didn't have to tell us that Wormtail killed Cedric or that Snape has no connection with vampires. She could have simply ignored these questions and save herself the need to lie. I personally believe that she sometimes lies to us when saying how much she liked the movies (she was probably told that thousands will lose their jobs if they fail) but I'd be very disappointed if she lies to us about the plot. But on a second thought, I agree that things would be MUCH more interesting if JKR is fooling us. Specifically, this might very well mean that: 1. Lupin switched bodies with James before GH (as I proved here before). 2. Voldemort is Harry's grandfather. 3. Harry is the HBP. 4. Lily was a DE . 5. Crookshanks is an animagus. 6. Book 6 is actually called "Harry Potter and Toenail of Icklib?gg" (Ha! Fooled you! You all thought it's going to be "Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince"). > > Pippin > whose comprehensive ESE!Lupin essay is racing the Accio > deadline Neri: Congratulations! But I hope submitting it to the Accio doesn't mean you are not allowed to publish it here as well? BTW, stating in the Accio that JKR can fool her readers in her website may lead to an amusing result: JKR might hear about it and deny in her website that she is fooling us, but the fans will just say that she is fooling us again. Neri From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Thu Dec 23 19:29:06 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 19:29:06 -0000 Subject: Did Snape Try to Warn James at GH? (Re: Here is an interesting Snape one) In-Reply-To: <200412231051143.SM01224@devbox> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120504 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Vivamus" wrote: > Doesn't the Fidelius charm mean that only the secret keeper can reveal the > location? Therefore, if Severus was there, Peter must have chosen to give > the location information directly to Snape. Unless you are suggesting > Sirius was ESE (which I don't think fits with Peter's confessions in the > Shrieking Shack), Peter must have revealed it to Severus. > Kneasy: I've snipped your scenario because, guess what? I've one of my own, which fits better - well, I think so anyway; you may not agree. What the theory doesn't specify is *when* Snape tried to warn the Potters. That could be crucial. We know that Peter became SK only a few days before Voldy came a-calling. OK, why change SK's? Because there is a known, immediate threat, that's why. Right, it goes like this: 1. Sirius is SK 2. Snape gets information that the Potters are going to be attacked 3. He goes to SK Sirius, who takes him to the Potters 4. Snape passes on the warning, Sirius rubbishes it, James sides with him 5. Snape goes back to DD, tells him what happened 6. Meanwhile Sirius has second thoughts and for whatever the reason he persuades James to swop SK with all the consequences that entails 7. *But both DD and SS believe Sirius is still SK* 8. Death and destruction; everybody thinks Sirius is SK, Sirius to Azkaban, no questions asked. 9. Guilt+++ from Sirius Sound reasonable? Kneasy From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Thu Dec 23 23:08:35 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 15:08:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Snape at Godrics Hollow In-Reply-To: <003d01c4e8b5$22910330$0400a8c0@pensive> Message-ID: <20041223230835.91436.qmail@web53101.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120505 --- Sherry Gomes wrote: > There's one problem with this theory, though I find it a > fascinating theory,... but how would Snape have found them? They > are under the fidelius charm. > If he had indeed found them, then it seems James would have known > Peter spilled the beans. Not that the knowledge would have changed > anything, because there wasn't time for James to tell. I know > we've been over the > whole, how-could-Dumbledore-know ... about the happenings at GH, > but it > stretches my mind a bit to think Snape could have known where the > potters were. Well, perhaps Snape didn't talk to James at Godric's Hollow. Perhaps he talked to him at Hogwarts, in Dumbledore's office. Although Fudge might believe that Voldemort was after "the Potters", Dumbledore, James and Lily know that he's really after Harry. So I can see James popping out of the GH house regularly to pick up groceries, etc. and to meet DUmbledore at Hogwarts for news and updates. So let's posit a scenario: Snape is at Hogwarts, as a teacher from September 1 1981 on. He tells Dumbledore that Voldemort is after the Potters and the Potters go into hiding. He continues to spy, and tells Dumbledore that the Potters' secret-keeper has turned traitor. He doesn't know the name - but like everyone else assumes it must be Sirius. So he goes to Dumbledore and tells him Sirius Black has turned traitor and will betray the Potters. Snape askes Dumbledore to tell James because he knows James will believe him. Dumbledore, knowing James will have questions and also being the kind of guy who likes to reconcile enemies, insists Snape must tell him himself. So he summons James (somehow) and James appears and Dumbledore says "this is our spy who has probably saved your son's life; now he has more news for you." Snape tells James that Sirius has turned traitor. James reacts with disbelieve and not a little rudeness and leaves. Snape is angry with James, with himself, "what's the point of helping if I'm just not believed", etc. And the rest of the story falls into place. James gets back home and perhaps within a day Voldemort comes to call.... Magda __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From manawydan at ntlworld.com Thu Dec 23 22:50:41 2004 From: manawydan at ntlworld.com (manawydan) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 22:50:41 -0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Snape at Godrics Hollow References: <1103803522.9093.56847.m12@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <002101c4e941$d587a840$704b6d51@f3b7j4> No: HPFGUIDX 120506 Sheery wrote: > If this was the case, then it seems Snape would have known that Peter was > the traitor, and it would make his treatment of Sirius in POA despicable, > planning to send an innocent man to be kissed by the dementors? Remember, > Snape couldn't have known where the potters were unless the secret keeper > revealed it. If he knew they were in danger, and he knew where they were, > then he knew Peter was the spy. Even for those who ascribe to the ESE > Sirius theory--which I do not--Snape has never said anything to indicate he > knows it from personal knowledge. My mixed feelings about Snape would make > me love to have him be the one trying to warn the Potters, but I just don't > see how he could have. if you can, please clarify. Who does Sevvy hate most in all the world (with the possible exception of James)? Where's the risk in leaving Sirius to rot in Azkaban? James and Lily knew that Sirius was innocent, but they're dead. Voldemort knew, but he's dispersed and disembodied. Peter knew, but (as far as anyone knew at the time) he's dead too. If any of the other DE lieutenants knew, they're not going to spill the beans. I can see Sevvy allowing himself a little smirk, just one, mind you, at the thought that he's in the clear and the Marauders are no more. After all, Sirius won't last long in Azkaban, no one does... A dish best eaten cold. Cheers Ffred O Benryn wleth hyd Luch Reon Cymru yn unfryd gerhyd Wrion Gwret dy Cymry yghymeiri From antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com Thu Dec 23 20:18:05 2004 From: antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com (antoshachekhonte) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 20:18:05 -0000 Subject: Book 7 release? (was: Re: JKR stands for Just Kidding, Really) In-Reply-To: <20041223173434.2667.qmail@web53505.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120507 > Do I remember correctly? Didn't she say somewhere (and I am drawing blank where... really need to lay off of the egg nog - not) that book 6 and 7 would for the most part be written simultaneously? I know that we just got the official word for book 6 and I should be greatful for that, but what does everyone think about what that says for book 7? Could that be what she was really refering to when she said that her baby was racing Harry's next adventure? Is she trying to get as much done on book 7 as she can so that she can take a few months off with the baby and not feel guilty? > > moonmyyst Antosha >From what I know about publishing, I don't think she's going to be able to work full-time on book seven for the next few months. Generally the stretch of time between when the draft is submitted and when the final pdf files are sent off to the printer is an incredibly intense back-and-forth period of editing, negotiation with the editor(s), writing of promotional copy, etc. In order to reach the shelves, a book of this size (I'm talking number of copies and pages) is going to have to go to the printers around the time we are given to understand her baby is due--February. So, no, I don't think we'll start hearing rumors about the book seven publication date any time soon. Though you may be right-- she may be trying to get as much done before child #3 appears on the scene.... And it would be nice if we were to get a similar gift for NEXT holiday season! :nods vigorously: From gbannister10 at aol.com Thu Dec 23 23:31:12 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 23:31:12 -0000 Subject: Character Discussion: Lily In-Reply-To: <20041223192811.77020.qmail@web25102.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120508 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Hans Andr?a wrote: - in message 120498: Hans: > I think it's almost inevitable that Jo will give Lily some flaws. It's > precisely Harry's flaws that make us identify with him so much. We love him > for his nobility, his courage, his fairness, and his selfless actions, but > we, and I'm including many millions of children and adults all over the > world, identify with Harry because of the difficulty he's having coping with > the pain of bereavement, or with Malfoy's and Snape's constant jibes about > Harry's parents and friends, or with his powerlessness against Voldemort and > his allies. > > What Jo is doing is personifying forces that a person, who wants to enter > the absolute spiritual centre of his/her being, will meet and have to deal > with. In order to personify these forces properly, you have to make them > truly human. And to be truly human you have to have flaws! - and in message 120499: Hans: > That is the message of Harry Potter. Drink the Living > Water and you shall return to your divine origins. Geoff: As I have remarked on previous occasions, I cannot buy into your views on the Path of Liberation. I have on several occasions said that I see Harry as an everyman, a representative of a Christian - or of a seeker for truth - on his journey through life. I have expanded on these thoughts in messages 81249, 104472, 107680 and 110254 among others. Back in message 84481, Hans, writing as Ivan Vablatsky, said that it was not a case of Harry being either everyman or Christ, he was both, a view which I disagreed with in message 84556. Again, in 84481, references are made to New Age teaching - the age of Aquarius - in which Christianity has no place. I have said in the past that although HP is not overtly Christian, it reflects the views of its author, as did Tolkien's work; I do not necessarily look for direct comparisons to Christian teaching but feel that the mores expressed in the books will echo those views. With reference to your comment in message 120499, Christ indicated in John 4 in his conversation with the Samaritan woman that he was the one who provides the living water to those who believe. This raises the whole question of what do we read into the stories of Harry Potter? Why did JKR write them? For her own satisfaction? Probably. To give pleasure to millions of people? Also probably. To be read at different levels of understanding. Yes - I might say in passing that one of my favourite books if "Winnie the Pooh" which has two distinct levels of understanding at least. Which then leads to the next thought. Are they books for children? Yes, but not children alone; for children at heart in the best meaning of this. Are they textbooks for faith to proselytise? No. There are signposts and pointers for those who look but I do not believe that they have been written deliberately to fit a pattern imposed by someone other than the author. I read the books firstly for pleasure; I like Harry. I see myself as I was many years ago, brash, impulsive, questioning, uncertain and certain that everything is black or white. The greys have come with age. I do not read them a priori in order to cross intellectual swords with others on the group. That is a spin off which can lead us into over-analysis and theorising which only drains the first fresh enjoyment of each book which we experienced as we came to it. Hm. Where did I leave my tin hat? From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Fri Dec 24 00:52:27 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 00:52:27 -0000 Subject: Did Snape Try to Warn James at GH? (Re: Here is an interesting Snape one) In-Reply-To: <200412231051143.SM01224@devbox> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120509 Vivamus: > But if SS first opposed LV when LV went to kill Lilly and James > and their son, that seems different. LV would certainly kill > someone who did that, but if Severus' devotion to Lilly was the > hook that let LV control him, it would mean that it meant that LV > made a mistake in not realizing that was the one place he could > not control SS. Hence, the "he will be killed, of course" line > instead of "none of you will rest until that miserable treacherous > slime, SS, has been hunted down and ... [fill in appropriate > things LV would come up with]" SSSusan: I'm enjoying the possibilities arising out of this thread, but I need a little help with what you meant here, Vivamus, by "the hook that let LV control him." Could you flesh that out for me a bit? How would Voldy have used that hook? Why would it make a difference in how casually or maliciously he said he would be killing Severus? I understand the notion that if LV figured SS had opposed him & spied for DD against him long before, he'd be more adamant about killing him, but I'm not quite understanding the significance of Lily as "the hook that let LV control him." Siriusly Snapey Susan From iris_ft at yahoo.fr Fri Dec 24 01:28:27 2004 From: iris_ft at yahoo.fr (iris_ft) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 01:28:27 -0000 Subject: Please Jo, don't take the easy path (Re: more predictions from Jo) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120510 Hi, There's at least one thing you can give for sure concerning "The Mooseming Mystery": quoting has become a rather complex exercise (A wrote that B wrote and then C replied ) Well, it's better if I stick to the "Redde Caesari quae sunt Caesaris" rule. So, long ago Kneasy wrote: 7. Harry's memories of the Godric's Hollow incident (PoA chap 9) > > are interesting, particularly if you have a suspicious mind. Lily > > is pleading with Voldy and she asks him not to 'take' Harry, but > > to take her, kill her instead. Now 'take' can be used as an alternative > > for kill, as in 'take a life' but it's use here when Harry is at the > wrong > > end of a wand seems a bit strange; 'kill' or 'hurt' would be a more > > common usage. Maybe Voldy wanted to possess Harry too. > And a member named Jo (by the way, should we read "Jo.sturgess" as "Jo points to your guess", just for the fun of making the mystery thicken?) replied: > Suspicious mind, you hum it, I'll sing it. > Maybe Voldy thought he could transfer to Harry in place of Tom, > picking up the powers that he 'knows not' into the bargain. > > "You do not seek to kill me, Dumbledore? called Voldemort" > .....stuff..... > "We both know that there are other ways of destroying a man, Tom" > Dumbledore said calmly". > Knobbled from the inside out, that can't be pretty (the thumb > prickling alone will drive you crazy). > Iris (I solemnly swear that my pen name doesn't hide anything but a fan): Of course I know that the last word ("scar", and everything that comes before) has to belong to the author, and that fans have no right to try to add their own spice to the mixture. However That possibility of Voldemort "transferring to Harry in place of Tom" doesn't sound very original, IMVVHO (in my very, very humble opinion). I don't know what you think, but I would feel rather deceived if we happened to learn that Voldemort is actually an evil entity travelling through centuries, since the beginning of times, possessing people, making them become villains and finally leaving them when the moment has come to choose another mediator, or better said, another victim. It would not only sound like an old fashioned tune (we already have many stories telling us that the villain is actually a poor bloke who happens to be possessed by a very evil force), but it also would lessen the importance of personal choices. In other words, it would ruin one of the most interesting themes of the series. Can you imagine the scene? Tom Marvolo Riddle, at last free from his inner bad influence, and saying with a tremolo in his voice: "Oh, forgive me Harry, it wasn't my fault, that evil thing did oblige me to commit atrocities; I didn't want, I was suffering, but it was stronger than me"? Or the evil entity trying to control Harry ("Come with me and we will rule the world"), and Harry replying: "You failed, I will be an Auror"? It's only a personal view, but I think that ending with the idea of evil as "something that comes from outside" would be rather frustrating, too easy, and would nearly spoil the whole series. But I hope that JKR won't follow the easy path, and that she won't lessen the importance she gave to personal choices. Maybe that's because I love these books so much, but I'd like to see more than a classical ending. Which is a paradox, if you consider that the whole series roots in classical culture. May as it be, I hope "our" Jo will keep on posting on the list; her (his?) posts are *very* interesting. Personal message to Madame Rowling, if she happens to be a member and click on my post: Merci mille fois pour ces merveilleux livres, et passez un Joyeux No?l. Amicalement, Iris From imamommy at sbcglobal.net Thu Dec 23 23:20:14 2004 From: imamommy at sbcglobal.net (imamommy at sbcglobal.net) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 23:20:14 -0000 Subject: So, children series or not? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120511 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > > > > > Sandy > snip > The AR (Accelerated Reader -- a reading comprehension program they > use in schools in the U.S.) level ranges from 5.5 for SS to the > upper 6's for the next 3; and 7.2 for OOTP. (as far as I can tell, > the reading level is basically grade level, based on median readers > for that grade level). In my public library, books 1-3 are shelved > as juvenile lit; 4 and 5 as teen lit. > > My third grader and several classmates have read and passed the > tests on several of the books; the best reader in the class has > completed all five. > snip > > Potioncat: > The public library in my area shelves the books in several different > areas. But you're saying that those 3rd graders are reading at 5th > grade and above and I would agree. > > I do agree that the books can be read at many different levels. > Probably far more than JKR ever imagined. But I'm also sure she put > levels into these books. > snip > Potioncat imamommy: Someone help, because I can't find the quote, but didn't JKR say something (answering queries about the themes being age appropriate for children) that basicaaly stated she was writing the story that was in her, without purposely dumbing it down for kids, but that she felt the average 9 year old would be able to handle it? I wish I'd had these books when I was nine, instead of Sweet Valley High! imamommy From iris_ft at yahoo.fr Fri Dec 24 02:10:43 2004 From: iris_ft at yahoo.fr (iris_ft) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 02:10:43 -0000 Subject: The mirror onthe website (Re: This one is interesting from mooseming) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120512 I think we have to thank moonmyyst for bringing back old posts; they are full of very interesting things. Example: > > 3) On Rowling's website, the butterfly is an interesting creature. We > > know that Cho means "butterfly" in both Japanese and Korean. What's > > interesting about the butterfly on Rowling's site is that during the > > day it's colored blue with yellow markings (Ravenclaw colors), but at > > night it's green with silver/grey markings (Slytherin colors). Could > > this be a clue from Rowling herself that Cho isn't to be trusted? Bowlwoman Ah, yes, the website. And the `Do not disturb' door, hiding the Christmas tree. What makes me wonder is the way you can see this tree. You need to click on the door reflecting in the mirror, on the right side of the screen. The door in the mirror closes as the `Do not disturb' door opens. In other words, the door in the mirror is logically the `Do not disturb' door. And the mirror stands on the `Do not disturb' door right side. So here's my problem: 1) Jo's website designer made a mistake and should reconsider how logic works. 2) It's not a mistake; the mirror isn't showing what is in the room, it rather opens a way to another place. Consider also that this place is lit with a candle, while the room is lit with electricity (you can play with the switch). And this mirror could be a clue concerning the two remaining books. `I show not your face but your heart's desire', the Mirror of Erised says. Could this heart's desire be another place, or another time (Godric's Hollow, 31 October 1981)? And then, what would happen? Just a wild speculation, hoping this post isn't OT Amicalement, Iris From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 24 08:07:18 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 08:07:18 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries / Dursleys' abuse In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120513 Del wrote: > The style of narration is the narrator's only, it doesn't *have* to be influenced by the story he is relating at all. Usually, an invisible narrator like the one in HP remains strictly consistent from the beginning to the end of a book or series, no matter what happens. Carol responds: I think that JKR took a while to find her narrative voice. Clearly, the first chapter of SS/PS could not have been told using Harry as the POV character, and one or two of the snippets on her website seem to indicate that she originally considered using Draco to provide an alternate perspective. Eliminating him changed the focus drastically, whether for better or for worse, I can't say. But her limited omniscient perspective doesn't work for the background on the Riddle murders, so she adopts a completely different narrative voice there and switches briefly to an unknown POV character partway through. There are one or two other places where she temporarily slips out of Harry's perspective. And in no case does she tell the story using his voice--which, IMO, is a good thing. An author has to create a situation in which a first-person narrator is telling his own story, and that won't work for Harry, whose survival is supposed to remain an open question. So what happens to that narrative voice as Harry grows and changes? My thought has always been that the style, like the subject matter, grows with the characters. The "Uranus" joke in PoA would be out of place in OoP, for example, not just because the main characters are older but because the situation is darker and direr. (I'm at a loss for comic passages in OoP. Were there any?) I notice things like narrative voice and lapses in point of view (for example, the narrator reporting that Harry is asleep, which is odd if he's inside Harry's mind). But absolute consistency in narrative technique is probably rare. Look at "Moby Dick," for example, and the problems Melville experienced when he realized the limitations of having a common sailor as the POV character. He resorted to Shakespearean soliloquies and similar devices so that Ishmael could hear Starbuck's thoughts and then finally gave it up and used a third-person omniscient narrator. The narrative technique is inconsistent and seriously flawed, and yet the book remains a masterpiece. Or consider LOTR. The narrative voice of the opening chapters is almost the avuncular storyteller of "The Hobbit." The voice in "The Council of Elrond," which deals with "higher" matters, is almost biblical (and cringe-worthy if you don't like that kind of thing.) But LOTR, too, is generally considered a masterpiece and the narrative inconsistencies are almost certainly deliberate. I don't rate JKR on a par with Tolkien, much less with Melville, as a great writer. I think her lapses *are* lapses in some cases. I found the opening chapter of GoF jarring, as if I'd landed by accident in the wrong book. And yet there's really no other way she could have handled that information. So I'm not sure that I agree with your assertion that invisible narrators usually remain consistent, but I do agree that JKR's inconsistencies are to some extent a flaw in the books. She seems to have given most of her thought to the plot, including characters' backstories and planted clues, and less thought to seemingly secondary elements like narrative voice. Quite possibly, unlike Melville, she isn't even aware of the problem. I'd venture to say that most readers don't notice it, either, except to be vaguely bothered by the change in "tone." How much of it derives from Harry's state of mind in OoP, I can't say without rereading the book and choosing some representative passages. If the book as a whole is deliberately dark and the darkness reflects Harry's POV, perhaps it isn't the flaw that it seems to be. Maybe Books 6 and 7 will have the same "voice" and it will seem more appropriate as more people die. Or maybe it's a fluke, reflecting Harry's anger in OoP. Ask me what I think on this topic when HBP is out. :-) Carol, who just realized that it's now Christmas Eve! From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 24 01:56:23 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 01:56:23 -0000 Subject: Death Eaters In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120514 Neri wrote: There seems to be a connection between Death Eaters, the Dark Mark and fear. Here is what Arthur had to say about this: > > ***************************** > GoF, Ch. 9: > "Ron, You-Know-Who and his followers sent the Dark Mark into the air > whenever they killed," said Mr. Weasley. "The terror it inspired you > have no idea, you're too young. Just picture coming home and finding > the Dark Mark hovering over your house, and knowing what you're about to find inside. " Mr. Weasley winced. "Everyone's worst fear the very worst " > ***************************** > > Everyone's worst fear, a boggart maybe? > So: the Dark Mark, eating Death, eating emotions, saying or not saying Voldemort's name, and fear. How exactly are all these connected? Carol responds: Forgive me for saying this so bluntly, but a boggart *in itself* isn't "everyone's worst fear." If it were, everyone's boggart would be a boggart, which is impossible, since the boggart takes the shape of each person's individual worst fear. It isn't the boggart itself but whatever it embodies that's terrifying to the particular wizard it's reacting to. Ron isn't afraid of Hermione's boggart and she probably isn't afraid of his. But Mr. Weasley is almost certainly talking in general terms about something much more real and terrible than the spiders or zombies or full moons that particular witches and wizards see when they face a boggart: the fear of opening the door of their supposedly safe home and finding a loved one or loved ones dead on the floor. That must have happened to Mr. and Mrs. Weasley when they saw the Dark Mark hovering sinisterly above the house (or houses) of Mrs. Weasley's brothers, Fabian and Gideon. And that very real fear is represented by Mrs. Weasley's boggart: she fears that she'll see the same thing again: her husband or her children or Harry murdered by Voldemort. I'm surprised that there wasn't a Dark Mark hovering above the boggart!Weasleys. I absolutely agree that the Dark Mark is connected with fear, but not because it's terrifying in itself. Ghastly and ugly, yes, but the kids don't run away in terror because it hasn't been invested with meaning for them as it has been for the adults. Mr. Weasley, OTOH, knows what it means, and even though he isn't overcome with terror when he sees it at the QWC, he's very much aware of what it portends: Death Eaters becoming active once again, and doing much worse things than Muggle juggling. The Dark Mark seems to be a grotesque caricature of Salazar Slytherin with a Death's head (skull) for a face and a snake or basilisk for a tongue. Tom Riddle, Slytherin's heir and himself a parseltongue, seems to have taken a distorted version of the statue in the Chamber of Secrets with the basilisk coming out of its mouth and adopted it as his badge, to be burned into the arms of his Death Eaters so that they can never forget their sworn allegiance to him and to be cast into the air to mark the scene of their murders, claiming responsibility for them (as gangs of thugs and terrorists do in the RW) and warning the friends and relatives of the dead person of what they're about to find. It's a boast, a kind of group pride in doing evil, for which they get no individual credit because they are the masked and anonymous servants of the master whose sign they have cast like a curse into the darkness. And the more evil deeds they do, the more often that Dark Mark appears, the more terror it will hold for the ordinary citizens of the WW. Or that's how I see it. Carol, who woke up thinking today was Christmas Eve, which shows how much *she* knows! From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 24 05:10:50 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 05:10:50 -0000 Subject: Character Discussion: James In-Reply-To: <20041223193733.94675.qmail@web25110.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120515 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Hans Andr?a wrote: James is the personification of the force in the human > being that makes him actively search for the meaning > of life. There is an intuitive feeling that our true > destination does not lie in this world and that the > latter is illusory and basically cannot satisfy the > inner hunger for peace, for goodness, truth and > justice. > > What turns the passive voice into an active one? It's > the end product of many incarnations full of > disappointment, disillusionment and suffering. It's > the subconscious realisation that nothing in this > world can really satisfy the inner core of our being. > That all our endeavours are just mad rides on the > merry go round at Vanity Fair. That's James. Alla: Hans, thank you for the second installment of your series. Do you think that James was always searching for the meaning of life or younger James is not really concerned with the meaning of life? Since I am of the opinion that younger James took quite an active stance against the Dark Arts, although we don't know much about it, I wonder what you think. Hans: > James learns to turn himself into a stag, as we all > know. The stag is the age old symbol for the thirst > for the Water of Life. The word "hart" is sometimes > used and I love that because it's so close to the word > "heart", where Lily lives and where this thirst comes > from. This word is used in the Revised Standard > Version of the Bible I read, and Psalm 42 has a > fantastic little piece which sums up everything I can > say: > > "As a hart longs for flowing streams, > so longs my soul for thee, O God. > My soul thirsts for God, > for the living God." > > The Water of Life is the symbol for the original, pure > immortal life-force which enters the heart of those > who have this longing for it. I'll come back to that > later. Alla: Could you please educate me a little bit, since although I am fascinated with this kind of imaginary, I am not really familiar with it? Is stag a biblical symbol for the Water of life and "stag" and "hart" are the same thing? Alla: Thank you again and happy holidays to you and to everybody on the list. From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Fri Dec 24 09:22:44 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 09:22:44 -0000 Subject: These are interesting predictions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120516 moony myst bumped to the front this message from jo - Mooseming: > > OK folks here are my predictions: OWLs Hermione will pass everything she takes, come top in everything except: Neville will come top in Herbology Harry in DADA Luna in Ancient Runes Valky: As someone has already noted, Luna is in Ginny's year, not Harry's so this prediction is totally bodgie, then again maybe not *totally*. Following an assumption based on the extraordinarily *author*itative, other, posts by our mooseming, that the author of Harry Potter, herself is behind the alias, then there are two initial possibilities that I think befit a reason for this "deliberate" ;D error. 1 To throw *us* off the scent of the predictions that weren't really predictions but instead actual previews of the real story. 2 A spice in the mix to inspire conversation about Luna and Runes and see where it leads us. (for whatever reason) Or 3 Why not both? ;D But....... The real surprises come later in the post. Jo *predicted*: > > Ron will pass: > > Divination with the highest mark! > > Valky: aha, MEAT!!! Is Jo JKR confirming a side of the seer!Ron trapezoid, or merely a subscribing fan? hmmmmm I have always felt that seer! Ron was OBVIOUSLY true, and wished I had come up with it. Jo again: > > Neville however, will get an 'O' in Potions! > > Valky: This, nugget, is the main reason I am inclined for-ways in the is she isn't she, question. With Snape failing dismally to reach Neville on a human level, what are we constantly reminded about in potions class for the last five years? Hermione is teaching him!!! When someone *listens* to the voice of reason.... you see..... the amazing can happen. Oooh I just LoVE this prediction from Jo, who else looks forward to reading something similar to this in HBP: Jo: > > NEWTs and House Integration in Year 6 NEWT classes are attended by all four houses together, so HRH will > be seeing a lot more of other house members. This year in a spirit of interhouse friendship students will be given the opportunity to switch houses. > > A Slytherin sleeper to transfer to Gryffindor! (Who will become > > Harry's best new friend). > > Valky: With the authority I spoke of earlier, mooseming posted on another thread that Harry would do something really bad in HBP. So exactly who and what about this "Slytherin Sleeper"?!!! Is this someone who leads Harry down the alternate existence that he once rejected under the sorting hat? I thought it was *Draco* that took the "detour".... lol Ok OK I am getting carried away with the whole, this is JKR thing, but hey this one is out there and really cool either way! If JKR ain't writing it then send me the link to the fan fic. :D Salutations of the Season to all!! Valky From joj at rochester.rr.com Fri Dec 24 05:02:12 2004 From: joj at rochester.rr.com (coolbeans3131) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 05:02:12 -0000 Subject: Hermione In Trouble? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120517 wrote: > > > Morning everyone, > I've been pondering this for a while now, and I'm a little worried > for our girl Hermione. I think she could be in for big trouble - > she's made a lot of enemies, more so, I think, than even Harry. > First (that I can think of) was Rita Skeeter, then in OoTP, was > Umbridge (who she led into the forest - surely for her destruction > at the hand of the centaurs), then the centaurs themselves. Surely > we'll see some kind of repurcussions for Hermione in HBP. Do you > think that she is "marked" in her own way now? > Thoughts anyone? > -K Joj writes: I've been worried about the possibility of Malfoy hurting her. He's going to be different now. Hurting Hermione would work two-fold. It would get back at Harry and Hermione. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 24 06:51:08 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 06:51:08 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120518 Del wrote: > > So it is with us. Having emotions is of course fine, JKR *does* intend > us to react emotionally to her stories. But using those emotions to > discuss facts is dangerous in that it can easily lead us to false > conclusions. > > > Alla replied: > But using emotions does not mean to me to forget the facts, it means > that I refuse to turn off my emotions when I analyse the facts. Carol responds: I guess what matters is your intention in presenting your emotions, or your view of the story as filtered through your emotions. If you're only sharing your reaction--this is how I feel--then, fine. No one can argue with you. It's rather like stating that you hate licorice. No one can argue with that, either, even if they like licorice themselves. But if you want to persuade us to agree with you, then emotions aren't going to help your argument. If we already *feel* as you do, we'll agree with you. If we don't share your emotions, we require rational argument and canon evidence to convince us. I, for one, can't get emotionally involved in the abuse issue because it has so little effect on Harry--and because he's a fictional character in a fictional world. I did find Umbridge's detentions revolting, but I don't want to spend hours discussing them. And I'm much more interested in figuring out what makes Snape tick than in castigating him for his teaching methods. Anyway, my original post on "knee-jerk emotional reactions" had nothing to do with anyone now involved in this thread. It had to do with a certain poster who seems now to have mercifully departed this list who thought that anyone who disagreed with his highly emotional and exceedingly biased interpretation was not only stupid but wicked. I have nothing against emotional interpretations calmly and civilly presented--except that they can never persuade those who don't share those emotions. And I also object to expressions like "don't ever think that" which attempt to impose one person's views on others. (And, no, Alla, I'm not talking about you here.) Carol, who didn't mean to start an avalanche with a three-word phrase From Vivamus at TaprootTech.com Fri Dec 24 12:01:55 2004 From: Vivamus at TaprootTech.com (Vivamus) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 07:01:55 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Did Snape Try to Warn James at GH? (Re: Here is an interesting Snape one) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200412240702939.SM01216@devbox> No: HPFGUIDX 120519 > Vivamus: > > But if SS first opposed LV when LV went to kill Lilly and James and > > their son, that seems different. LV would certainly kill > someone who > > did that, but if Severus' devotion to Lilly was the hook > that let LV > > control him, it would mean that it meant that LV made a > mistake in not > > realizing that was the one place he could not control SS. > Hence, the > > "he will be killed, of course" line instead of "none of you > will rest > > until that miserable treacherous slime, SS, has been hunted > down and > > ... [fill in appropriate things LV would come up with]" > > > SSSusan: > I'm enjoying the possibilities arising out of this thread, > but I need a little help with what you meant here, Vivamus, > by "the hook that let LV control him." Could you flesh that > out for me a bit? > How would Voldy have used that hook? Why would it make a > difference in how casually or maliciously he said he would be > killing Severus? > > I understand the notion that if LV figured SS had opposed him > & spied for DD against him long before, he'd be more adamant > about killing him, but I'm not quite understanding the > significance of Lily as "the hook that let LV control him." > > Siriusly Snapey Susan Vivamus: Several scenarios come to mind, but if Severus was in love with Lilly, even though she wouldn't have anything to do with him, it is quite possible that LV used that obsession against him, either in directly promising her to him in some fashion (not likely, but possible,) or in indirectly hinting that SS would "prove himself" to her by his actions as a DE, or simply in recognizing that this (proving himself to Lilly) was the motivation for his coming to LV in the first place. Of course, if SS turns to LV in bitter rejection because Lilly chose James, it works almost the same way. LV is brilliant, and very, very good at controlling people. In his new avatar, we've only seen him in his "evil overlord" mode, but Tom Riddle's treatment of Ginny presents a better picture of how he can pretend to be nice, and draw people out until he is ready to "set the hook", i.e., present them with the fact that they have gone past a point of no return. It doesn't have to be Lilly, of course; it could have been any source of obsession. Lilly was just suggested to me by the pensieve scene, as the *reason* that was his worst memory -- not that he was bested and bullied by James and Sirius, which must have happened many times, but that Lilly called him "Snivellus" in front of others. SS is clearly deeply unhappy, and his distress has a lot to do with James, I think -- but I don't think his relationship with James could possibly be enough by itself for either his general unhappiness or his animosity to Harry. If his conflict with James resulted in his loss of the love of his life, and her death resulted when he could have prevented it (because James wouldn't listen), that indeed makes his attitude to Harry (who looks so much like James, but has Lilly's eyes) believable. Harry would be a constant, living reminder to him of the ultimate failure of his life. Assuming this would be true, aren't the potential emotional repurcussions for Harry when he finds this out simply awesome? As to the difference in how casually or maliciously LV said he would be killing Severus, it would mean that he had known beforehand that he couldn't bend SS that far, so his desertion and opposition at that moment was somewhat understandable. (I'm not implying that LV is even slightly understanding or forgiving of the failures of others; only that he is a superb manipulator who understands how others work enough to realize his mistake with Severus.) I would expect, of course, that he would want to drag SS out in front of all the other DEs, and torture him to death slowly, as an example to the others not to have the same thoughts. (Hmmm. Harry rescues Severus, anyone?) What is lacking in LV's comment is the animosity associated with personal betrayal, which seems very out of character for LV, which in turn makes me think there are other things behind SS's defection, in LV's eyes. Vivamus, who seriously hopes JKR participates on this list in some fashion From eloiseherisson at aol.com Fri Dec 24 09:24:36 2004 From: eloiseherisson at aol.com (eloise_herisson) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 09:24:36 -0000 Subject: Did Snape Try to Warn James at GH? (Re: Here is an interesting Snape one) In-Reply-To: <200412231051143.SM01224@devbox> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120520 Kneasy: > > Certainly posters have speculated that there was someone else > > at GH (usually the finger points at Lupin, though Sevvy is > > second favourite) I can't recall ever reading a truly > > convincing theory as to why. Eloise: Not truly convincing, but I think Lupin's reaction to Harry saying he heard his father's voice has often been the springboard. Personally, I go with the face value reading that it was James. > Vivamus: > Doesn't the Fidelius charm mean that only the secret keeper can reveal the > location? Therefore, if Severus was there, Peter must have chosen to give > the location information directly to Snape. Eloise: Only the Secret Keeper can reveal the location, but I don't think we've established what happens once he does. Is the Charm thereby completely broken? Does it mean that from that point onwards, the secret is not magically protected from *anyone* or that only the person who has been directly told has access to it? Sirius was aware that there was something wrong, which was why he went to check on Peter. Was it because he had an awareness that the Charm was no longer working, that *he* could remember the Potter's whereabouts, or somehow knew he would be able to find them? The Charm was certainly not working by the time the rescue party got there, or else they wouldn't have been *able* to find Harry. Actually, I don't think we know exactly what the effect is on those who already know the information before the Charm is performed. If Godric's Hollow was the Potters' *home*, then their location wouldn't exactly be a secret from their friends. What I think the Charm did was to prevent anyone from *finding* them even if they *did* know where they were, unless the secret was divulged by the Secret Keeper. So by that understanding, even if only Voldemort were able to *find* the Potters, Snape or Lupin or anyone else could have been there because they knew the location and been able to shout a warning blind, as it were. I agree with others that it's highly unlikely that it was Snape whose voice Harry heard as that would immediately have blown his cover, which is inconsistent with his present role, although there are problems with the latter anyway, not least Voldemort's comments about the three missing DEs. I do hope we get a convincing explanation of that and of why the threats haven't been carried out yet (as far as we know) in the next book. ~Eloise From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 24 05:30:59 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 05:30:59 -0000 Subject: Snape at Godrics Hollow In-Reply-To: <20041223230835.91436.qmail@web53101.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120521 Magda: snip. So let's posit a scenario: Snape is at Hogwarts, as a teacher from September 1 1981 on. He tells Dumbledore that Voldemort is after the Potters and the Potters go into hiding. He continues to spy, and tells Dumbledore that the Potters' secret-keeper has turned traitor. He doesn't know the name - but like everyone else assumes it must be Sirius. So he goes to Dumbledore and tells him Sirius Black has turned traitor and will betray the Potters. Snape askes Dumbledore to tell James because he knows James will believe him. Dumbledore, knowing James will have questions and also being the kind of guy who likes to reconcile enemies, insists Snape must tell him himself. So he summons James (somehow) and James appears and Dumbledore says "this is our spy who has probably saved your son's life; now he has more news for you." Snape tells James that Sirius has turned traitor. James reacts with disbelieve and not a little rudeness and leaves. Snape is angry with James, with himself, "what's the point of helping if I'm just not believed", etc. And the rest of the story falls into place. James gets back home and perhaps within a day Voldemort comes to call.... Alla: I can see this scenario happening too. I don't know which one is more plausible - Snape coming to GH or doing what you said, but again I am quite sure of one thing - Snape did try to warn James and I also want to believe that Snape did not know that Sirius was innocent. Hmmm, maybe Snape did both - he tried to warn James prior to disaster AND he came to GH. Not sure. From spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com Fri Dec 24 13:11:52 2004 From: spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com (dungrollin) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 13:11:52 -0000 Subject: Did Snape Try to Warn James at GH? (Re: Here is an interesting Snape one) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120522 > Kneasy: > > > Certainly posters have speculated that there was someone else > > > at GH (usually the finger points at Lupin, though Sevvy is > > > second favourite) I can't recall ever reading a truly > > > convincing theory as to why. > > Eloise: > Not truly convincing, but I think Lupin's reaction to Harry saying he heard his father's voice has often been the springboard. Personally, I go with the face value reading that it was James. > > > Vivamus: > > Doesn't the Fidelius charm mean that only the secret keeper can > reveal the location? Therefore, if Severus was there, Peter must have chosen to give the location information directly to Snape. > > Eloise: > Only the Secret Keeper can reveal the location, but I don't think > we've established what happens once he does. Is the Charm thereby > completely broken? Does it mean that from that point onwards, the > secret is not magically protected from *anyone* or that only the > person who has been directly told has access to it? > I don't think the secret keeper telling someone the secret can completely break the charm, because DD sends Harry the slip of paper with the location of the HQ of the OotP. If the secret was then out to everyone, the whole charm would have to be re-done, and all the people who were in on the secret before Harry (and including Harry) would have to be told all over again. So I agree with Vivamus, that if Snape was at GH, Peter must have told him, or at least told Voldy and Snape at the same time. As to Mooseming's posts and whether Snape *was* there... The posts seem to me to have a friendly but lightly mocking tone. If it *was* JKR, I sincerely doubt that any real hints or clues were given. In fact, I'd go further and say that we could categorically rule out everything that Mooseming suggested. But I doubt that JKR will confirm or deny it, so it's one more thing that we can disagree about 'til the cows come home in book 7. Anyway, since then, hasn't JKR said that Peter was responsible for hiding Voldy's wand? Thus Peter was *definitely* there. Dungrollin From mysticowl at gmail.com Fri Dec 24 09:48:27 2004 From: mysticowl at gmail.com (Alina) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 04:48:27 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] JKR stands for Just Kidding, Really In-Reply-To: <20041223173434.2667.qmail@web53505.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041223173434.2667.qmail@web53505.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120523 > Do I remember correctly? Didn't she say somewhere (and I am drawing blank where... really need to lay off of the egg nog - not) that book 6 and 7 would for the most part be written simultaneously? I know that we just got the official word for book 6 and I should be greatful for that, but what does everyone think about what that says for book 7? Could that be what she was really refering to when she said that her baby was racing Harry's next adventure? Is she trying to get as much done on book 7 as she can so that she can take a few months off with the baby and not feel guilty? > > moonmyyst I never saw anyone saying that the books would be written simultaneously. I think what you're thinking about is JKR's statement that book 6 and 7 are sort of one book in two parts, rather than stand-alone books the way the series had them so far. Alina. From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Fri Dec 24 13:30:01 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 13:30:01 -0000 Subject: Did Snape Try to Warn James at GH? (Re: Here is an interesting Snape one) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120524 > Kneasy: > > 1. Sirius is SK > 2. Snape gets information that the Potters are going to be attacked > 3. He goes to SK Sirius, who takes him to the Potters > 4. Snape passes on the warning, Sirius rubbishes it, James sides > with him > 5. Snape goes back to DD, tells him what happened > 6. Meanwhile Sirius has second thoughts and for whatever the > reason he persuades James to swop SK with all the consequences > that entails > 7. *But both DD and SS believe Sirius is still SK* > 8. Death and destruction; everybody thinks Sirius is SK, Sirius to > Azkaban, no questions asked. > 9. Guilt+++ from Sirius > > Sound reasonable? SSSusan: My only concern is how we get from 3 to 4. Why would Sirius [esp. if he's already SK] take *Snape* TO the Potters? Given their history with Snape, I can't think of any reason other than because he believe Snape is right that the Potters are targets. But if that's the case, then why does Sirius turn around and rubbish the idea when Snape presents it to J/L? Siriusly Snapey Susan From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 24 15:03:21 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 15:03:21 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120525 Carol: snip. I have nothing against emotional interpretations calmly and civilly presented--except that they can never persuade those who don't share those emotions. And I also object to expressions like "don't ever think that" which attempt to impose one person's views on others. (And, no, Alla, I'm not talking about you here.) Alla: Yes, yes, thank you, I also think civility is the key. Personally I believe that the ONLY type of argument which does not belong on the list is flame type. Any other type of argument (related to canon, of course and which does not belong on other groups) should be fair game , otherwise it is just imposing on the right to free debate. :o), in my opinion of course. And I believe that emotions WITH facts can be very persuasive, but that is just my opinion and to each their own. Happy holidays. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 24 02:42:41 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 02:42:41 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120526 Alla wrote: >> I mean, sure, Dursleys looked much more caricature like in the > earlier books, BUT Harry's suffering was VERY real, starting from > him spending ten years in the cupboard. Carol responds: I won't go into the abuse theme, which I agree is presented in a Cinderellaish way in SS/PS, especially, but forgive me for nipicking here. Harry didn't spend ten years in a cupboard (or closet, as we'd say in America--"cupboard" (= cup board) suggests enclosed shelves for dishes in the kitchen!). We don't know at what point he was transferred to the little room under the stairs. I doubt if he was there from the time he was fifteen months old until just before his eleventh birthday. And in any case, he only slept there (and was occasionally sent there for punishment). He didn't spend twenty-four hours a day there (except when he was punished). He walked around the house and presumably the neighborhood, and on school days he spent his waking hours in school. Many children up until the nineteenth century at least had similar sleeping quarters with no ill effects. And Harry takes the spiders in stride. (Placing Ron in a tiny room he shared with spiders would be a different matter.) It's *his* (Harry's) cupboard and he seems used to it, but he doesn't spend ten entire years there. (I'm not defending the Dursleys, just trying to stick with the fictional facts of the story.) Carol, wondering how "cup board" got transmuted into storage closet From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 24 15:34:14 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 15:34:14 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120527 Carol responds: I won't go into the abuse theme, which I agree is presented in a Cinderellaish way in SS/PS, especially, but forgive me for nipicking here. Harry didn't spend ten years in a cupboard (or closet, as we'd say in America--"cupboard" (= cup board) suggests enclosed shelves fordishes in the kitchen!). We don't know at what point he was transferred to the little room under the stairs. I doubt if he was there from the time he was fifteen months old until just before his eleventh birthday. And in any case, he only slept there (and was occasionally sent there for punishment). He didn't spend twenty-four hours a day there (except when he was punished). He walked around the house and presumably the neighborhood, and on school days he spent hiswaking hours in school. Many children up until the nineteenth century at least had similar sleeping quarters with no ill effects. Alla: Hmmm, I always thought that that exactly what happened - he was stuck there since he was fifteen months old . Is there anything in text that conradicts it? You are right though - we don't know one way or another when it happened. Of course he got out sometimes, but even the fact that he had to sleep there is bad enough , in my opinion. The fact that many children had similar sleeping quarters... Well, consider that emotional reaction, but I am glad they don't anymore and hope that they never will again. :o) Society is moving forward after all. From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Fri Dec 24 07:07:37 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 07:07:37 -0000 Subject: Did Snape Try to Warn James at GH? (Re: Here is an interesting Snape one) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120528 > > Mooseming: > So what if Snape came to warn the Potters and James didn't > believe him, not because he was too arrogant but because he > couldn't see that Snape had the capability to change. James is > then partly responsible for Lily's and his own death because he > like Snape couldn't move on and believe in people. > > > Jen: Whether Mooseming is JKR or not, this is the best explanation I've seen for why Snape hated James and hates Harry even more. If he stuck his neck out to save James that night at GH, gave up his cover and risked his own life, and James laughed in his face or refused to believe him or even attempted to curse/hex him.....whoo, boy, I can't see Snape ever forgetting or forgiving that. > > > > Kneasy: > This one would certainly work in plot terms, matching known or > suspected character traits to the action - though there's one little question that Mooseming doesn't address - who gave Snape the Potters location? Valky: Ohhh yes Easy Kneasy!, Snape is doing his spy work glued fast to Voldys swishy cloak, when he happens upon a crumpled piece of paper that fateful night, he craftily sneaks a peek and finds it to be a note, written on parchment that bears the very insignia of the Potter family itself, on it is written, "The Potters are located at number street Godrics Hollow", of course. And voila Snapes conclusion that the one who betrayed James was someone so close to them he could use the Potters own parchment and seal to do it. Of course this way he doesn't have any idea precisely *who* it is that wrote the note, but it does seem more likely to be Sirius. Hey, then again, maybe the note was written on Parchment bearing the seal of the Noble house of Black. Peter did plan to frame Sirius from the start, I believe. oh yeah lol, nigh night ESE Sirius, sorry Kneasy. The canon introducing a note as a way to reveal the Fidelius Charms secret makes precedent.. :D Valky, who also wonders if "Jo" is aware that her posts have become the talk of HPFGU. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 24 14:44:44 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 14:44:44 -0000 Subject: Did Snape Try to Warn James at GH? (Re: Here is an interesting Snape one) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120529 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dungrollin" wrote: snip. > Anyway, since then, hasn't JKR said that Peter was responsible for > hiding Voldy's wand? Thus Peter was *definitely* there. > Alla; It was reported at Leaky as unsubstantiated fan report from Edinburg festival (I just went and double checked at quotes) so we don't know for sure. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 24 14:57:48 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 14:57:48 -0000 Subject: Time travel with Mirror of Erised. Was: The mirror onthe website In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120530 Iris: snip. And this mirror could be a clue concerning the two remaining books. I show not your face but your heart's desire', the Mirror of Erised says. Could this heart's desire be another place, or another time (Godric's Hollow, 31 October 1981)? And then, what would happen? Alla: Oh, Iris. Very interesting. Miror of Erised as time-travel device? Since I do think that time travel will play important role in the future plot and yes that Harry may attempt to go to GH, why not? It will be certainly easier to use than Time-Turner which needs to eb turned A LOT to go back that far. You know, in one of the chates the answer to the question "Will Harry be time traveling again", the answer was "Not telling". Hmmm. From luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca Fri Dec 24 16:15:57 2004 From: luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca (Bee Chase) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 11:15:57 -0500 (EST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Snape at Godrics Hollow In-Reply-To: <002101c4e941$d587a840$704b6d51@f3b7j4> Message-ID: <20041224161557.46672.qmail@web52003.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120531 Ffred: I can see Sevvy allowing himself a little smirk, just one, mind you, at the thought that he's in the clear and the Marauders are no more. After all, Sirius won't last long in Azkaban, no one does... Luckdragon: Perhaps this is why in one of Jo's interviews she said "you shouldn't think he's too nice" and "he's worth keeping an eye on" (refering to Snape). 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 paul_terzis at yahoo.gr Fri Dec 24 06:46:07 2004 From: paul_terzis at yahoo.gr (paul_terzis) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 06:46:07 -0000 Subject: Hermione In Trouble? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120532 >headlesshunt wrote: > > Morning everyone, > I've been pondering this for a while now, and I'm a little worried > for our girl Hermione. I think she could be in for big trouble - > she's made a lot of enemies, more so, I think, than even Harry. > First (that I can think of) was Rita Skeeter, then in OoTP, was > Umbridge (who she led into the forest - surely for her destruction > at the hand of the centaurs), then the centaurs themselves. Surely > we'll see some kind of repurcussions for Hermione in HBP. Do you > think that she is "marked" in her own way now? > Thoughts anyone? > -K I couldn't agree more. Hermione is definitely in deep trouble. She is a powerful witch with a wide array of skills and knowledge. She is also a symbol for every muggleborn wizard and witch because she proves beyond any doubt that the pureblood dogma is horse@#$t. And in addition she is the closest friend of Harry Potter aka the Boy who lived. All these reasons are enough to put her high in the hit list of the Death-Eaters and any secret group inside and/or outside of the ministry of magic that consider independent and powerful people (Harry Potter, Hermione Granger) as a threat to their agenda. Cheers, Paul From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 24 02:24:36 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 02:24:36 -0000 Subject: Usual cast of suspects (a few more added) In-Reply-To: <20041222005425.43180.qmail@web53510.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120533 Lilyp wrote: > First, I'd like to notice that when JKR said about new deaths in > HBP, she didn't say it was a very known character. And of course > there'll be deaths. There is a war going on. > > moonmyyst replied: > In several of the interviews that I have read today, JKR was supposedly quoted as saying that one of the main characters would die in this book. She would not give clues to which one, only that it was not Harry or LV. > > Carol responds: I think the articles you've read are returning to the idea that one major character will die, which was thrown out into the public domain when JKR said on her website that she was going to kill more characters. But IMO, that was a misreading by reporters not familiar with her earlier interviews. The actual question was "Are you going to kill any more characters?" and the actual response was, "Yes. Sorry." No indication of how many, how major, or which book, but the implication is that "characters"--plural--will die. In fact, we've known for some time that there are "more deaths coming." Deaths, plural. Which probably means that, since the war has actually begun at last, the deaths will begin in Book 6. And since we've already lost a character apiece in GoF and OoP, before the war officially began, I will be very surprised if only one character dies in HBP. Unless, of course, you can find a quotation in which Jo herself says that there will be one, and only one. Carol From Vivamus at TaprootTech.com Fri Dec 24 12:23:14 2004 From: Vivamus at TaprootTech.com (Vivamus) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 07:23:14 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Did Snape Try to Warn James at GH? (Re: Here is an interesting Snape one) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041224072317.SM01216@devbox> No: HPFGUIDX 120534 > > Vivamus: > > Doesn't the Fidelius charm mean that only the secret keeper can > reveal the > > location? Therefore, if Severus was there, Peter must have chosen > to give > > the location information directly to Snape. > > Eloise: > Only the Secret Keeper can reveal the location, but I don't > think we've established what happens once he does. Is the > Charm thereby completely broken? Does it mean that from that > point onwards, the secret is not magically protected from > *anyone* or that only the person who has been directly told > has access to it? Vivamus: Remember when Moody (I think it was Moody) showed Harry the writing from DD that told him where the OOtP HQ was? Moody could read the message, and Harry could, to. AFTER Harry read it, Moody destroyed it -- presumably because the writing could continue to show OTHERS where the OOtP was hiding -- all without breaking the Fidelius Charm. One thing we have never been told yet is what happens if someone tries to spill the beans if they have been told, but they are not the SK. What if Harry tried to tell someone else where the OOtP was, for example? For some reason, he wouldn't be able to, either because the magic would have kept him from doing so, or because he could, but it would have broken the Fidelius. Otherwise, Moody could simply have taken Harry in the door, or just told him where it was. > Sirius was aware that there was something wrong, which was > why he went to check on Peter. Was it because he had an > awareness that the Charm was no longer working, that *he* > could remember the Potter's whereabouts, or somehow knew he > would be able to find them? The Charm was certainly not > working by the time the rescue party got there, or else they > wouldn't have been *able* to find Harry. Vivamus: As their best friend, I assumed he would have been told where they were living, just as Harry was told about 12GP. > Eloise: > Actually, I don't think we know exactly what the effect is on > those who already know the information before the Charm is > performed. If Godric's Hollow was the Potters' *home*, then > their location wouldn't exactly be a secret from their > friends. What I think the Charm did was to prevent anyone > from *finding* them even if they *did* know where they were, > unless the secret was divulged by the Secret Keeper. > So by that understanding, even if only Voldemort were able to > *find* the Potters, Snape or Lupin or anyone else could have > been there because they knew the location and been able to > shout a warning blind, as it were. > > I agree with others that it's highly unlikely that it was > Snape whose voice Harry heard as that would immediately have > blown his cover, which is inconsistent with his present role, > although there are problems with the latter anyway, not least > Voldemort's comments about the three missing DEs. I do hope > we get a convincing explanation of that and of why the > threats haven't been carried out yet (as far as we know) in > the next book. Vivamus: I agree that it is still a puzzle, but to me, the best explanation by FAR is the one mooseming posted. Vivamus, who wonders if JKR is delighted or upset at the feeding frenzy over mooseming From lilyp at superig.com.br Fri Dec 24 15:40:07 2004 From: lilyp at superig.com.br (lilypo2007) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 15:40:07 -0000 Subject: Usual cast of suspects (a few more added) In-Reply-To: <20041222005425.43180.qmail@web53510.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120535 > lilypo2007 wrote: > First, I'd like to notice that when JKR said about new deaths in > HBP, she didn't say it was a very known character. And of course > there'll be deaths. There is a war going on. > > moonmyyst wrote: > In several of the interviews that I have read today, JKR was > supposedly quoted as saying that one of the main characters would > die in this book. She would not give clues to which one, only that > it was not Harry or LV. Sorry for the delay to reply. I was looking for my sources in the wrong place. I don't think there was any new interview. The articles that were published on 21st december were clearly based in things that had already been announced in JKR's site. And there, in the FAQs section , here is what she says about deaths: "Are you going to kill any more characters? Yes. Sorry." http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/faq_view.cfm?id=68 Lilypo From skater314159 at yahoo.co.uk Fri Dec 24 03:07:25 2004 From: skater314159 at yahoo.co.uk (Megan) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 03:07:25 -0000 Subject: Snape at Godrics Hollow In-Reply-To: <20041223202203.44159.qmail@web52001.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120536 Luckdragon: > > I have been posting the unpopular theory that the Potters were in > possession of the P/S stone at the time of their demise. > moonmyyst: > > Have you read much on Jo's site? One of the things that you get (I forget which puzzle you have to solve) is an alternate chapter for PS/SS. In it is the part where they are discussing the stone. IIRC, they are discussing Harry's parents being in possession of the stone. > Luckdragon: > > Yes! The discarded first chapter of Philosopher stone and the fact that she states on another area of her site that the first chapter of book six is based on a discarded chapter she almost used in books 1 and 2. That is the only word from JKR I have to support my theory. Skater314159 writes: Yes... the page has a scene with the trio discussing how the PS ended up in his parents' possession (and thier bank vault)... I had trouble reading it myself (I have dyslexia and can't read my own cursive - much less anyone elses!) and had a friend decipher/transliterate it for me and I was *very* interested because it mentions that James and Lilly are implicated in the theft of the PS... and that seems to imply by what is recorded on this paper that they had something to do with the death of people... I agree that this would have been a very diffrent story-line; but I also wonder if there aren't clues here that Jo is giving to us. I haven't seen much talked about in the books or even recently on her website that is just superfluous or mentioned/cited without reason. And since she has said repeatedly that PS is important for the whole septology and that HBP was originally part of the story... and since we are going to learn more about Lilly and James in HBP (hopefully we'll learn what each of them did in life, as well as what their occupations were...) I think that this page isn't just a random discarded item... I think that it contains important clues. I just wish I knew what they are... >From skater314159, who usually lurks here because she is shy and afraid her observations aren't as good as you guys'... and who really had hoped that Snape was a vampyre/Nosferatu... From chnc1024 at AOL.COM Fri Dec 24 18:51:42 2004 From: chnc1024 at AOL.COM (chnc1024 at AOL.COM) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 13:51:42 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Snape at Godrics Hollow Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120537 In a message dated 12/24/2004 9:52:25 AM Pacific Standard Time, luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca writes: Luckdragon: Yes! The discarded first chapter of Philosopher stone and the fact that she states on another area of her site that the first chapter of book six is based on a discarded chapter she almost used in books 1 and 2. That is the only word from JKR I have to support my theory. Chancie: But lets do remember that it was posted on her site! I seriously doubt JKR would give information central to the plot out like that. I supose it is still possible though. But mostly, I think that the events leading up to GH, and the missing 24 hours will be most likely the info she removed from SS and CoS. Chancie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From chnc1024 at AOL.COM Fri Dec 24 19:00:27 2004 From: chnc1024 at AOL.COM (chnc1024 at AOL.COM) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 14:00:27 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: So, children series or not? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120538 In a message dated 12/24/2004 10:55:38 AM Pacific Standard Time, imamommy at sbcglobal.net writes: imamommy: Someone help, because I can't find the quote, but didn't JKR say something (answering queries about the themes being age appropriate for children) that basicaaly stated she was writing the story that was in her, without purposely dumbing it down for kids, but that she felt the average 9 year old would be able to handle it? I wish I'd had these books when I was nine, instead of Sweet Valley High! imamommy ************************************************************************ Chancie: I do remember her saying that she didn't write for a particular age group, just writing a story she'd like to read. But I don't think I remember her saying a 9 year old should be able to handle it. I do however remember her saying that she recieved a letter from a parent stating that she thought the books were too dark for her child. JKR responded by saying, "DONT READ THE OTHER BOOKS." Chancie: [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From senderellabrat at aol.com Fri Dec 24 18:09:36 2004 From: senderellabrat at aol.com (Sen J) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 18:09:36 -0000 Subject: The Animagi Black Was:Do Dobby & Lucius know the prophecy? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120539 SSSusan: *snip* [Why would HE know Sirius' capability of becoming a black > dog animagi, for instance?] *snip* Sen: I think once Pettigrew finally decided to head over to the DE camp, he spilled his guts about what he knew. This would be the little rat's moment of glory. Being the center of attention and giving a *lot* of extremely important info to Voldemort himself (if not the DE's as well). Not only did he know to tell about the animagi factor & Lupin being a werewolf, he'd be able to tell about what's going in on in the Order. If there did happen to be a DE eavesdropper during the prophecy moment, he'd be able to tell about the Potters AND the Longbottoms having boys that fit the criteria (I don't know of any other way they would know otherwise). I think he sent Bellatrix & co. (IIRC.. sorry if I've got it wrong. It's been awhile since I've reread) to handle the Longbottoms and was to arrive later after he finished with the Potters. Either that OR he hit the Longbottoms first. Sorry for the drift in thought... I think Pettigrew was the key factor in the DE's getting the info they wanted. I don't believe Snape would've done this because he seems to be the type who would stay silent unless spoken to out of respect. A Silent dutiful respectful DE I guess you could say. Either that or by the time Pettigrew came over, he was already being the double agent. Just my 2 cents. Merry Christmas! Sen From spoonmerlin at yahoo.com Fri Dec 24 12:38:10 2004 From: spoonmerlin at yahoo.com (Brent) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 12:38:10 -0000 Subject: Ginny's full name. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120540 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dungrollin" wrote: > > > I'm afraid that Juniper only makes me think of gin. (Which is a > > thought I'm about to act upon, given the other posts on the board at > > the moment...) > > > > Hmm. > Well, Genever is Dutch Gin, as I mentioned the last time this came > up. Arthur has a lost weekend in Amsterdam, absolutely fascinated by > Muggle er, appliances, the local fire-water and it's effects. > Ginny is named in honour of the event. > > Probably not true, but who cares? > Be creative; invent a scandalous rumour. I think "Ginevra" is the italian or spanish spelling for "Guinevere". Look for "King Arthur" and "Ginevra" and you'll see. That fits with other King Arthur names of Weasleys. Percy for Percival, Arthur(obviously). Charles (Charlie), George, William (Bill) are all kings in England as well. I think it is kind of a royal/Arthur legend. I don't know how Molly or Ron would fit that scheme but maybe she just picked name she like and were all crazy looking for meaning in them. Brent From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Fri Dec 24 18:54:50 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 18:54:50 -0000 Subject: Did Snape Try to Warn James at GH? (Re: Here is an interesting Snape one) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120541 Vivamus: > > Doesn't the Fidelius charm mean that only the secret keeper can > > reveal the location? Therefore, if Severus was there, Peter > > must have chosen to give the location information directly to > > Snape. Eloise: > Only the Secret Keeper can reveal the location, but I don't think > we've established what happens once he does. Is the Charm thereby > completely broken? Does it mean that from that point onwards, the > secret is not magically protected from *anyone* or that only the > person who has been directly told has access to it? > > Sirius was aware that there was something wrong, which was why he > went to check on Peter. Was it because he had an awareness that > the Charm was no longer working, that *he* could remember the > Potter's whereabouts, or somehow knew he would be able to find > them? SSSusan: I don't think this was the case, Eloise. I thought Sirius had *arranged* to meet with Peter in advance, hadn't he? That might mean he thought something was wrong; or it might mean he simply wanted to double-check and was planning to do that routinely. I suspect it was only when Peter didn't *show* that Sirius got worried. Eloise: > The Charm was certainly not working by the time the rescue party ? > got there, or else they wouldn't have been *able* to find Harry. SSSusan: I'm not sure about this. We don't know the specifics of the mechanism, but I know a lot of people around here seem to believe that, once the party being protected has died, the charm is broken. Which means the rescue party would have been able to find the Potters. [Unless you're referring specifically to *Harry* having been protected by the FC? And since he didn't die, he should still be protected by it?] Eloise: > What I think the Charm did was to prevent anyone from *finding* > them even if they *did* know where they were, unless the secret > was divulged by the Secret Keeper. So by that understanding, even > if only Voldemort were able to *find* the Potters, Snape or Lupin > or anyone else could have been there because they knew the > location and been able to shout a warning blind, as it were. SSSusan: An interesting notion! I wonder if shouting out a warning blind would be possible? Nothing tells us that not being able to see the protected party would equal their not being able to hear YOU. OTOH, you'd have to worry about whether they were at home to hear, if you couldn't see them! Siriusly Snapey Susan, enjoying about 15 mins. of peace before the Christmas shopping crew returns home. From stbjohn2 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 24 15:16:38 2004 From: stbjohn2 at yahoo.com (stbjohn2) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 15:16:38 -0000 Subject: So, children series or not? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120542 > imamommy wrote: > Someone help, because I can't find the quote, but didn't JKR say > something (answering queries about the themes being age appropriate > for children) that basicaaly stated she was writing the story that > was in her, without purposely dumbing it down for kids, but that she > felt the average 9 year old would be able to handle it? > Sandy: Is this what you're looking for? (from 6 Oct. 2000 scholastic books online chat -- transcript on Mugglenet.com) Do you think elementary-age children will be able to read the other three books in the series? Yes, I do. I personally feel the books are suitable for people aged 8 years and over. Though my daughter, who is seven, has read them all and not been very frightened ? but maybe she's tough, like her mother! imamommy wrote: I wish I'd had these books when I was nine, instead of Sweet Valley High! Sandy: I told my son just the other day, I would have loved to have Harry Potter and Lemony Snicket when I was his age. From stevejjen at earthlink.net Fri Dec 24 20:14:52 2004 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 20:14:52 -0000 Subject: Did Snape Try to Warn James at GH? (Re: Here is an interesting Snape one) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120544 > > Kneasy: > > This one would certainly work in plot terms, matching known or > > suspected character traits to the action - though there's one > little question that Mooseming doesn't address - who gave Snape the > Potters location? > Valky: > Ohhh yes Easy Kneasy!, Snape is doing his spy work glued fast to > Voldys swishy cloak, when he happens upon a crumpled piece of paper > that fateful night, he craftily sneaks a peek and finds it to be a > note, written on parchment that bears the very insignia of the > Potter family itself, on it is written, "The Potters are located at > number street Godrics Hollow", of course. > And voila Snapes conclusion that the one who betrayed James was > someone so close to them he could use the Potters own parchment and > seal to do it. > Of course this way he doesn't have any idea precisely *who* it is > that wrote the note, but it does seem more likely to be Sirius. > > Hey, then again, maybe the note was written on Parchment bearing the > seal of the Noble house of Black. Peter did plan to frame Sirius > from the start, I believe. Jen: Aha! The missing link. You're the crafty one, Valky ;). What time of day Snape goes to the Potters is the key. Peter betrayed their location sometime on Halloween, but we don't know how long it was between the time Peter left his secret location to tell Voldemort, and Sirius found Peter missing. Peter could eaily have left his hiding place Halloween morning, expecting to be back when Sirius checked on him that night. Instead, something blocked him from returning. So, like you postulated, Snape comes across the note Peter gave to LV disclosing the Potter's location, and Snape immediately rushes there in an attempt to get James & Lily to another location. When James refuses to believe Sirius would betray him, Snape leaves in disgust. Not long after that, LV appears. I tend to take it at face value that James was the voice Harry heard, and that if Snape did go to the Potters that night, he was gone before Voldemort showed up. We already have canon evidence from the Occlumency incident that Snape is willing to give up on a vitally important task if he is humiliated. If James humilated him at GH, Snape would most likely chalk it up to Potter arrogance and leave. Jen From nrenka at yahoo.com Fri Dec 24 15:38:15 2004 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 15:38:15 -0000 Subject: Phenomenological readings (was: Re: Theoretical boundaries) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120545 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: > Nora signed: > "Nora finds that in analyzing music, emotional responses often lead > to uncovering the analytically most interesting parts, and is now > tempted to use Lewin's phenomenological language to talk about fans" > > Del replies: > Sure, but you'll have to explain all the big words first ;-) A facetious comment on my part, for sure, but if I had more time and a copy of the original to hand, it might be fun, although Lewin's work is, well...there's that article I've read 8 times and still don't get all of. :) Lewin's model is built for music, but it provides a technical way to talk about something rather difficult: our changing perceptions of a work. That's what the 'phenomenological' part is about: the process of perception. So, to apply it to the books, think about labeling an incident as such (an event, EVT), then considering the possible implications (IMP). Events can often point to multiple possible realizations, after all, and thus invoke expectations. (Expectations are also almost ALWAYS caught up with a visceral emotional response to a character: if you feel more positively about Snape, you expect different things from his character arc. Reality can be gratifying or disappointing, in this sense.) The event is then usually followed, sometimes at length, by a realization--which means that in retrospect, only one (usually) of those expectations proves to be correct. Thinking phenomenologically in Lewin's sense is something like working through a hypothetical reader's position at each point in the text. Reaction to event, consideration of different hermeneutic shadings for each possible realization (this all runs in something like a straight line, the linear experience of the text), and then with the arrival of the realization, the reader (originally a listener) is forced to go back and read/hear one possibility as *now* being actual reality. [Lewin applied this to a beautiful little Schubert song, pointing out how functional hearings of the chords are continually changing--and that having to change is a fundamental part of the experience and affect of the song. It's intentionally hilarious in applying the apparatus to a little Lied...] What makes this model interesting is how it lets one see into the process of reading the books and how we re-evaluate things. It's interesting to read PoA, with Snape's strongly implied insistence that Black is not deserving of mercy/a second chance, and then hit GoF, with the revelation of Snape's own second chance. Or Dumbledore and our changing position of his knowledge throughout the books. -Nora notes that this game is more doable when all is said and done, though From luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca Fri Dec 24 21:29:56 2004 From: luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca (Bee Chase) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 16:29:56 -0500 (EST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Did Snape Try to Warn James at GH? (Re: Here is an interesting Snape one) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041224212956.14356.qmail@web52007.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120546 Eloise: > What I think the Charm did was to prevent anyone from *finding* > them even if they *did* know where they were, unless the secret > was divulged by the Secret Keeper. So by that understanding, even > if only Voldemort were able to *find* the Potters, Snape or Lupin > or anyone else could have been there because they knew the > location and been able to shout a warning blind, as it were. SSSusan: An interesting notion! I wonder if shouting out a warning blind would be possible? Nothing tells us that not being able to see the protected party would equal their not being able to hear YOU. OTOH, you'd have to worry about whether they were at home to hear, if you couldn't see them! Siriusly Snapey Susan, enjoying about 15 mins. of peace before the Christmas shopping crew returns home. Luckdragon: I'd be more worried about whoever else might be lurking nearby hearing the shout and knowing the Potters were in the vicinity. 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 luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca Fri Dec 24 21:08:57 2004 From: luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca (Bee Chase) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 16:08:57 -0500 (EST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape at Godrics Hollow In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041224210857.20278.qmail@web52001.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120547 Megan wrote: Luckdragon: > > I have been posting the unpopular theory that the Potters were in > possession of the P/S stone at the time of their demise. > moonmyyst: > > Have you read much on Jo's site? One of the things that you get (I forget which puzzle you have to solve) is an alternate chapter for PS/SS. In it is the part where they are discussing the stone. IIRC, they are discussing Harry's parents being in possession of the stone. > Luckdragon: > > Yes! The discarded first chapter of Philosopher stone and the fact that she states on another area of her site that the first chapter of book six is based on a discarded chapter she almost used in books 1 and 2. That is the only word from JKR I have to support my theory. Skater314159 writes: Yes... the page has a scene with the trio discussing how the PS ended up in his parents' possession (and thier bank vault)... I had trouble reading it myself (I have dyslexia and can't read my own cursive - much less anyone elses!) and had a friend decipher/transliterate it for me and I was *very* interested because it mentions that James and Lilly are implicated in the theft of the PS... and that seems to imply by what is recorded on this paper that they had something to do with the death of people... I agree that this would have been a very diffrent story-line; but I also wonder if there aren't clues here that Jo is giving to us. I haven't seen much talked about in the books or even recently on her website that is just superfluous or mentioned/cited without reason. And since she has said repeatedly that PS is important for the whole septology and that HBP was originally part of the story... and since we are going to learn more about Lilly and James in HBP (hopefully we'll learn what each of them did in life, as well as what their occupations were...) I think that this page isn't just a random discarded item... I think that it contains important clues. I just wish I knew what they are... >From skater314159, who usually lurks here because she is shy and afraid her observations aren't as good as you guys'... and who really had hoped that Snape was a vampyre/Nosferatu... Luckdragon: We seem to think alike. I've been hoping for a Snape/vampire connection as well. You can view the translated (from Jo's hand to typed) early version of this letter if you use the yahoo search engine - put in Argo Pyrites in search window. One of the results is cosforums/searchthread. It explains how to navigate Jo's site and translates the letter. For some reason I can't connect using the URL; I could only access it through yahoo. 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 dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 24 16:02:02 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 16:02:02 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries / Dursleys' abuse In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120548 > > Carol responds: snip. Quite possibly, unlike Melville, she isn't even aware of the problem. I'd venture to say that most readers don't notice it, either, except to be vaguely bothered by the change in "tone." How much of it derives from Harry's state of mind in OoP, I can't say without rereading the book and choosing some representative passages. If the book as a whole is deliberately dark and the darkness reflects Harry's POV, perhaps it isn't the flaw that it seems to be. Maybe Books 6 and 7 will have the same "voice" and it will seem more appropriate as more people die. Or maybe it's a fluke, reflecting Harry's anger in OoP. Ask me what I think on this topic when HBP is out. :-) > Alla: Here is my question. Am I understanding you correctly that you are undecided yet whether the change in the narrative tone in OOP was warranted or not? Because I am of the opinion that she did it quite deliberately. Do you think it hurts the quality of the book or not? From luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca Fri Dec 24 21:25:57 2004 From: luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca (Bee Chase) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 16:25:57 -0500 (EST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Snape at Godrics Hollow In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041224212557.2698.qmail@web52002.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120549 Chancie: But lets do remember that it was posted on her site! I seriously doubt JKR would give information central to the plot out like that. I supose it is still possible though. But mostly, I think that the events leading up to GH, and the missing 24 hours will be most likely the info she removed from SS and CoS. Chancie Luckdragon: ...but Jo uses her site to give us clues. Perhaps some of the clues are not as apparent as others, but when the end comes we may be kicking ourselves at all the obvious clues she has given us that we have ignored. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] 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 chnc1024 at AOL.COM Fri Dec 24 22:10:26 2004 From: chnc1024 at AOL.COM (chnc1024 at AOL.COM) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 17:10:26 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape at Godrics Hollow Message-ID: <142.3bc30c11.2efdedd2@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120550 In a message dated 12/24/2004 2:00:06 PM Pacific Standard Time, luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca writes: Luckdragon: Both good points. For the first my answer would be that James hated and distrusted Snape so much he was blind to what was happening and it did not sink in until it was too late. ************************************************************** Chancie: I agree that IF something like this did happen, then James would probably be very scepical to say the least. However, James and Lily did know Voldemort was looking for them. I have a hard time believing that they would take a chance like that. I mean, ignoring a threat that could very well kill their son??? If I heard some one was looking to kill my baby girl, and that they knew were I was and they were on their way, I would definatly not just take my chances, whether I believed this person or not. Chancie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From klevasseur at earthlink.net Fri Dec 24 13:48:06 2004 From: klevasseur at earthlink.net (ms_luna_knows) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 13:48:06 -0000 Subject: Snape at Godric's Hollow / Snape "overhearing" Vold's plans In-Reply-To: <20041223142627.63579.qmail@web41804.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120551 > Cindi H: > Sirius certainly did not tell DD since he testified that Sirius was > the Potter's secret keeper, so Snape may have overheard VM planning > to kill the Potters. Snape would still assume it was Sirius who > betrayed them (but not hearing the actual betrayal to VM) and not > knowing that Sirius and Peter switched places. Only Sirius and > Peter knew of the switch. Ms. Luna, I have been wondering if Snape "overheard" Voldy's plans about attacking the Potter's by taking a little peek at Voldy's thoughts? We all know he is an occulmens (sp?). Could it be possible for Snape to delve into Voldy's thoughts for a quick second and maybe see the one thing that is most on his mind...killing the Potter's in GH? This way he wouldn't have had to know who told Voldy, only the information. Would Voldy know when someone "popped" in for a quick second? And although I believe Snape warning the Potters is a great and very possible theory, I can't believe that Snape would have hung around and waited for LV, and given himself away to LV as a double agent by trying to protect Harry or Lily, he would have been one of the bodies found in the wreckage. From foxmoth at qnet.com Fri Dec 24 16:43:37 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 16:43:37 -0000 Subject: Harry's cupboard was Re: Theoretical boundaries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120552 > Alla: > > Hmmm, I always thought that that exactly what happened - he was stuck there since he was fifteen months old . Is there anything in text that conradicts it? You are right though - we don't know one way or another when it happened.< Pippin: I don't have all my books with me, but doesn't canon say that Harry spent the next few weeks after his arrival being pinched and prodded by Dudley? It would be hard for Dudders to do that if Harry was in the cupboard all the time. In fact, locking Harry in seems to mean locking Dudley out -- could it be that the cupboard was originally meant to protect Harry from his cousin's predations? Honestly, there are millions of children in the world right now surviving in living conditions far worse than Harry's at the Dursleys, who have been hungry every night of their lives and have no home at all, much less a heated, lighted cupboard, with a mattress, access to schooling and books, glasses, television and newspapers. Harry is deprived only in relation to the spoiled and pampered Dudley. It occurs to me that if ten year old Harry is in his cupboard all the time, the only reason there are spiders in there is because Harry tolerates them -- otherwise he could sweep them out. Pippin From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 24 22:24:08 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 22:24:08 -0000 Subject: The Mooseming Mystery In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120553 amanitamuscaria wrote: > > Hey, Moonmyyst - Cheers for digging those posts out! > Heather - is that who you meant? > Reading the posts on their own doesn't have the same impact - I think > it seemed at the time that Jo was coming out with all this stuff, not > really _from_ other postings, more like _answering_ posts? In the > context of speculation at the time, and I've inhabited these pages > for quite awhile, I know different people generate their ideas > differently, but these posts just jumped off the page. > Must have done, to remember the handle! > Cheers, whoever you are, Jo! Carol responds: Well, we have one major clue as to her identity, the last naem Sturgess, which appears in her curtailed e-mail addy. Definitely not JKR. Carol From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Fri Dec 24 17:15:37 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 17:15:37 -0000 Subject: Comic passages in OotP (was:Theoretical boundaries / Dursleys' abuse) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120554 Carol: > The "Uranus" joke in PoA would be out of place in OoP, for > example, not just because the main characters are older but > because the situation is darker and direr. (I'm at a loss for comic > passages in OoP. Were there any?) SSSusan: Yup. Courtesy of those ol' Weasley twins, of course. Remember the fireworks they set off as a diversion for Harry? And later how all the teachers called Umbridge in to their classes to take care of them, since they weren't allowed to discuss anything besides their curriculum in classes? :-) And Minerva's classic, "It unscrews the other way"? You're right, of course, that they were fewer and farther between, as befit the more serious matters at hand & Harry's angrier tone in OotP. But I, for one, was very grateful for those brief humorous moments we received. I'm also a bit worried about Gred & Forge's absence from Hogwarts in HBP. Unless we get glimpses of them at work in their joke shop, where's the levity going to come from? Siriusly Snapey Susan From vmonte at yahoo.com Fri Dec 24 23:04:44 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 23:04:44 -0000 Subject: Was Snape lurking in PoA or was he on his way to meet with Peter Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120555 vmonte writes: In PoA Harry sees Peter's name on the map and goes looking for him inside the school. Is it possible that Snape was on his way to rendezvous with Peter but was accidentally caught by Harry? vmonte From yellows at aol.com Fri Dec 24 23:19:11 2004 From: yellows at aol.com (yellows at aol.com) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 18:19:11 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Comic passages in OotP (was:Theoretical boundaries / Durs... Message-ID: <42.5f51a052.2efdfdef@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120556 In a message dated 12/24/2004 6:15:25 PM Eastern Standard Time, susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net writes: > You're right, of course, that they were fewer and farther between, > as befit the more serious matters at hand &Harry's angrier tone in > OotP. But I, for one, was very grateful for those brief humorous > moments we received. How about the very funny scene in which Harry explains that he kissed Cho? Ron asked him how it felt, and Harry answered, "Wet." Then he realized how strange that sounded and told Ron that Cho had been crying. So Ron asked if Harry is that bad a kisser. :) I found plenty of humor in OoP. It was just told in ways that fit the darker situations and older characters. Brief Chronicles [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 24 23:32:40 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 23:32:40 -0000 Subject: Harry's cupboard was Re: Theoretical boundaries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120557 Pippin: I don't have all my books with me, but doesn't canon say that Harry spent the next few weeks after his arrival being pinched and prodded by Dudley? It would be hard for Dudders to do that if Harry was in the cupboard all the time. Alla: I was trying to figure out whether cupboard became Harry's room right away or as Carol suggested he may have spent some time in the normal room, when he was very young, which I doubt, but I don't remember anything one way or another. Pippin: Honestly, there are millions of children in the world right now surviving in living conditions far worse than Harry's at the Dursleys, who have been hungry every night of their lives and have no home at all, much less a heated, lighted cupboard.... Alla: "Perhaps it had something to do with living in a dark cupboard, but Harry had always been small and skinny for his age" - PS/SS, p.20 Pippin: It occurs to me that if ten year old Harry is in his cupboard all the time, the only reason there are spiders in there is because Harry tolerates them -- otherwise he could sweep them out. Alla: Ummm, are you sure that children's magic is THAT focused that everytime something goes on that child does not like he can change it? I am not sure that Harry could do something about the spiders, unless he was very angry about it. What if he was just upset? he does not even know that he has magic in himself yet. Alla, who is very annoyed with Yahoomort today, since her replies appear several hours after they were made, but realises that she is not the only one who has such problem. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 24 23:38:59 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 23:38:59 -0000 Subject: Was Snape lurking in PoA or was he on his way to meet with Peter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120558 Vmonte writes: In PoA Harry sees Peter's name on the map and goes looking for him inside the school. Is it possible that Snape was on his way to rendezvous with Peter but was accidentally caught by Harry? Alla: Are we talking about ESE!Snape? The one who together with Peter plans Voldie return? So, that would mean that Snape was not concerned about Trio safety at all, when he run to Shack? You know, I probably won't go that far,since I think when Snape runs to Shack his primary concern is revenge against Remus and Black, but right now I cannot come up with anything which directly contradicts what you suggest. Alla, It seems that Yahomort finally caught up now. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 24 23:42:42 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 23:42:42 -0000 Subject: Application for Head of House In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120559 Tammy wrote: > > Madam Pince - not really mentioned too much, I'd see her as a Ravenclaw though, being a librarian and all, or a Slytherin, since she's apparently mean. > > Potioncat responded: > > I don't think Madam Pince is a Ravenclaw because she doesn't really > want the kids using the books. A Ravenclaw librarian would be more > encouraging and helpful. Carol adds: Having just read Albus Dumbledore's delightful Foreword to QWA, which focuses on Madam Pince's shocked reaction to his request to copy QWA for Muggle readers, I think Madam P. may be a Slytherin. Either that or the WW in general is thoroughly prejudiced against Muggles and she's just expressing the view that the WW should remain hidden from our prying eyes. If that's the case, I'll go with Ravenclaw. Note her attitude that books are precious objects that should not be "pawed about, dribbled on, [or] generally maltreated," to which Dumbledore responds that such treatment is "a high compliment for any book." That protectiveness suggests Ravenclaw to me. Come to think of it, so does her reluctance to allow students into the restricted section. A Slytherin might think differently about allowing students access to Dark Magic. Tammy: > > Madam Pomfrey - Honestly I've no clue what house Madam Pomfrey > would have been in. I'd say she's probably a little too busy nursing > > students to actually be Head of House though. > > Potioncat: > Pomfrey is interesting because I'm not sure where JKR and I differ > on the House traits or on medical stereotypes. If ambition and > skill drove her to be the Mediwitch in charge then she could be a > Slytherin. (Here of course I'm looking at my view of outstanding > nurse practitioners in the U.S.) and of course taking the view that > not all Slytherins are bad. > > On the other hand, she could be Hufflepuff, because she is a hard > worker. (And I don't think Hufflepuffs are Duffers.) I can't give > really good reasons why, but I don't think Gryffindor or Ravenclaw. Carol responds: I think she's a Hufflepuff--loyal and hardworking, with a touch of the Helga Pufflepuff philosophy of treating all the students in the same way. > Potioncat: > I'll bet Kingsley is Gryffindor. He could come in if he were > injured enough that he couldn't continue as auror. (Shaded of To > Serve Them All My Days) He'd be good too! Carol responds: I agree that Kingsley is a Gryffindor. In fact, I'm willing to bet that most if not all of the Order members other than Snape and Mrs. Figg are Gryffindors. Loyalty to Dumbledore, himself a former Gryffindor, courage, and possibly antipathy to the Slytherin values that can push students in that house toward the DEs seem to be common traits among most of the Order--which really makes Snape the odd man out--and his moral courage extraordinary if he really is on DD's side, as I think he is. Potioncat: > Of course all this speculation would assume someone in the Head of > House position has to move out and a new one is needed for the plot. Carol responds: Well, I've changed the focus a bit here to focus solely on which House I think these people belonged to, but as for an HoH position being open, if DD is killed, MM will almost certainly become Headmistress, in which case, Gryffindor would need a new HoH. And Snape, though I hate to admit it, is also in danger, or will be in Book 7 (we know he won't die in Book 6), so Slytherin could need a new head as well. I don't think that Flitwick or Sprout is on the DE hit list, though I could easily be wrong. Carol, with apologies to the List Elves for posting twice to the mooseming thread before seeing their administrative warning From dontask2much at yahoo.com Fri Dec 24 17:19:55 2004 From: dontask2much at yahoo.com (charme) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 12:19:55 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Death Eaters References: Message-ID: <007501c4e9dc$c9c58ae0$6701a8c0@MITRE.ORG> No: HPFGUIDX 120560 From: "justcarol67" Neri wrote: There seems to be a connection between Death Eaters, the Dark Mark and fear. Here is what Arthur had to say about this: > > ***************************** > GoF, Ch. 9: > "Ron, You-Know-Who and his followers sent the Dark Mark into the air > whenever they killed," said Mr. Weasley. "The terror it inspired.you > have no idea, you're too young. Just picture coming home and finding > the Dark Mark hovering over your house, and knowing what you're about to find inside.." Mr. Weasley winced. "Everyone's worst fear.the very worst." > ***************************** > > Everyone's worst fear, a boggart maybe? > So: the Dark Mark, eating Death, eating emotions, saying or not saying Voldemort's name, and fear. How exactly are all these connected? Carol responds: Forgive me for saying this so bluntly, but a boggart *in itself* isn't "everyone's worst fear." If it were, everyone's boggart would be a boggart, which is impossible, since the boggart takes the shape of each person's individual worst fear. It isn't the boggart itself but whatever it embodies that's terrifying to the particular wizard it's reacting to. Ron isn't afraid of Hermione's boggart and she probably isn't afraid of his. charme: I don't believe I had such a literal interpretation of Neri's boggart comment, Carol. I think Neri meant that it could be a form of a boggart for some individuals: it's not inconcievable that when the Dark Mark appeared at some regularity it could have been some wizards' worst fears. Speak of which, it's possible that as wizards grow and mature, I can readily accept that their "worst fears" change too over time; what Ron and Hermoine individually have as their worst fears now may not be the same as they mature (although Ron is pretty stuck on spiders.) From yutu75es at yahoo.es Sat Dec 25 00:04:56 2004 From: yutu75es at yahoo.es (fridwulfa hagrid) Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2004 01:04:56 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Was Snape lurking in PoA or was he on his way to meet with Peter References: Message-ID: <009e01c4ea15$60229b30$8000a8c0@casa> No: HPFGUIDX 120561 > vmonte writes: > > In PoA Harry sees Peter's name on the map and goes looking for him > inside the school. Is it possible that Snape was on his way to > rendezvous with Peter but was accidentally caught by Harry? > Me (Fridwulfa) I'm sorry, but that's movie contamination. In the book Harry NEVER sees Peter's name on the map. Therefore he never goes looking for him in the middle of the night. Cheers, Fridwulfa From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat Dec 25 00:16:51 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2004 00:16:51 -0000 Subject: Was Snape lurking in PoA or was he on his way to meet with Peter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120563 Vmonte writes earlier : In PoA Harry sees Peter's name on the map and goes looking for him inside the school. Is it possible that Snape was on his way to rendezvous with Peter but was accidentally caught by Harry? Fridwulfa: I'm sorry, but that's movie contamination. In the book Harry NEVER sees Peter's name on the map. Therefore he never goes looking for him in the middle of the night. Alla: The first part of Vmonte's post can be movie contamination, but can we be sure that Snape did not go to Shack to meet Peter? :) Just to clarify - I am also guilty of not reading the post carefully - somehow I assumed that rendezvous with Peter was to occur in the Shack and Harry caught him in the Shack. My question still stands though. From gbannister10 at aol.com Fri Dec 24 17:40:27 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 17:40:27 -0000 Subject: Character Discussion: James In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120564 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Hans Andr?a > wrote: > > This word is used in the Revised Standard > > Version of the Bible I read, and Psalm 42 has a > > fantastic little piece which sums up everything I can > > say: > > > > "As a hart longs for flowing streams, > > so longs my soul for thee, O God. > > My soul thirsts for God, > > for the living God." > > > > The Water of Life is the symbol for the original, pure > > immortal life-force which enters the heart of those > > who have this longing for it. I'll come back to that > > later. > > > Alla: > > Could you please educate me a little bit, since although I am > fascinated with this kind of imaginary, I am not really familiar > with it? > > Is stag a biblical symbol for the Water of life and "stag" > and "hart" are the same thing? Geoff: A stag is the male of a large deer, especially the red deer and a hart is a male deer, escpecially a red, usually after its fifth year. OT, you may be interested to know that I see these deer almost every day when walking my dogs. Exmoor has one of the largest herds of red in the UK. One interesting thing which always occurs to me is that Harry's Patronus is the same as his father's Animagus form; I wonder what James' Patronus was? Or have I missed this somewhere? In Christianity, the stag has no symbolism. The comparison in the psalm is that we, the seekers, are like deer looking for water. The same Psalm, in the New International Version, which I tend to use reads: "As the deer pants for streams of water, so my soul pants for you, O God" As I remarked in an earlier post, the water of life is something which Christ promised to his followers. Alla: > > Thank you again and happy holidays to you and to everybody on the > list. Geoff: And the same to you..... From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Dec 25 01:02:52 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2004 01:02:52 -0000 Subject: Do Dobby & Lucius know the prophecy? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120565 Bethany wrote: > As for Lucius, he definitely has the right connections. Lucius is > obviously a major player, as he leads the group of DEs into the > Ministry of Magic even though others, like Bellatrix LeStrange > constantly claim to be LV's most devoted servant. (Shouldn't they > lead the attack then?) Carol responds: Not necessarily. "Most loyal servant" does not imply second in command. LV seems to use the DE's natural talents and inclinations. Lucius is a born leader and manipulator; Bellatrix is a sadist who specializes in the Cruciatus Curse; there's an Imperio specialist (Mulciber?) and a beast killer (Macnair). I'm guessing that Snape was the potions specialist and that LV had many uses for him. But I see no conflict between Lucius as an officer leading his troops in the raid and Bellatrix and the equally fanatic Barty Jr. being more loyal than he is. (I think Lucius is primarily interested in Lucius.) Sorry--company here. Can't finish post. Merry Christmas to all! Carol From vmonte at yahoo.com Sat Dec 25 01:18:20 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2004 01:18:20 -0000 Subject: Was Snape lurking in PoA or was he on his way to meet with Peter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120566 Fridwulfa wrote: I'm sorry, but that's movie contamination. In the book Harry NEVER sees Peter's name on the map. Therefore he never goes looking for him in the middle of the night. Alla responded: The first part of Vmonte's post can be movie contamination, but can we be sure that Snape did not go to Shack to meet Peter? :) Just to clarify - I am also guilty of not reading the post carefully - somehow I assumed that rendezvous with Peter was to occur in the Shack and Harry caught him in the Shack. vmonte now: Oops! I just watched the PoA movie with my son. Fridwulfa is right, Harry never goes looking for Peter--it's movie contamination. I just reread the chapter titled: Snape's Grudge, from PoA. I do, however, find it curious that Snape calls Lupin to his office immediately after he finds (and is insulted by) the map. In Snape's worst memory (Snape's penseive memory) we can hear James and gang calling each other by their marauder names. Did Snape call Lupin into his office because he knew that Lupin was one of the creators of the map? page 288, U.S. edition paperback: "Indeed?" said Snape. His jaw had gone rigid with anger. "You think a joke shop could supply him with such a thing? You don't think it more likely that he got it directly from the manufacturers?" Is he accusing Lupin of giving Harry the map? Is it possible that Snape knew about the marauders in high school? If he knew that Lupin was a werewolf, was he really almost killed by Sirius's prank? Or, did Snape have something else planned when he followed Sirius? And, did James foil his plan? We know the excuse Lupin gave for not telling Dumbledore that Sirius was an animagus. If Snape also knew about Sirius, what is his exuse for not telling Dumbledore? And, is this the real reason why Snape told Harry not to tell anyone about what he saw in the penseive? From imamommy at sbcglobal.net Sat Dec 25 01:27:41 2004 From: imamommy at sbcglobal.net (imamommy at sbcglobal.net) Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2004 01:27:41 -0000 Subject: The Mooseming Mystery In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120567 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > amanitamuscaria wrote: > > > > Hey, Moonmyyst - Cheers for digging those posts out! > > Heather - is that who you meant? > > Reading the posts on their own doesn't have the same impact - I think > > it seemed at the time that Jo was coming out with all this stuff, not > > really _from_ other postings, more like _answering_ posts? In the > > context of speculation at the time, and I've inhabited these pages > > for quite awhile, I know different people generate their ideas > > differently, but these posts just jumped off the page. > > Must have done, to remember the handle! > > Cheers, whoever you are, Jo! > > Carol responds: > Well, we have one major clue as to her identity, the last naem > Sturgess, which appears in her curtailed e-mail addy. Definitely not JKR. > > Carol Hey, I'm not sure if it's her or not, but I wouldn't think she'd use "Rowling" on her email address. That would be a bit too obvious. imamommy Sturgess...Podmore...Sir Properly-Decapitated Podmore...HBP...any connection? From luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca Fri Dec 24 21:17:48 2004 From: luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca (Bee Chase) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 16:17:48 -0500 (EST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Ginny's full name. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041224211748.22719.qmail@web52003.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120568 Brent wrote: --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dungrollin" wrote: > > > I'm afraid that Juniper only makes me think of gin. (Which is a > > thought I'm about to act upon, given the other posts on the board at > > the moment...) > > > > Hmm. > Well, Genever is Dutch Gin, as I mentioned the last time this came > up. Arthur has a lost weekend in Amsterdam, absolutely fascinated by > Muggle er, appliances, the local fire-water and it's effects. > Ginny is named in honour of the event. > > Probably not true, but who cares? > Be creative; invent a scandalous rumour. I think "Ginevra" is the italian or spanish spelling for "Guinevere". Look for "King Arthur" and "Ginevra" and you'll see. That fits with other King Arthur names of Weasleys. Percy for Percival, Arthur(obviously). Charles (Charlie), George, William (Bill) are all kings in England as well. I think it is kind of a royal/Arthur legend. I don't know how Molly or Ron would fit that scheme but maybe she just picked name she like and were all crazy looking for meaning in them. Brent Luckdragon: Ginevra is a form of Guinevere as noted above. It means "fair one". Molly is a form of Mary and means "perfect one" and is also a royal name. Ronald means "mighty, powerful". I believe Jo said Ron was based on 2 people she knew. Her best friend in youth Sean and someone her father was acquainted with named Ronald. Fred means "peace" George means "farmer" Bill = guardian Charlie = strong Arthur = noble and strangely I read that Percy means "pierce the veil" All names are in some way Arthurian or related to Royalty. 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 Sponsor Get unlimited calls to U.S./Canada --------------------------------- 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 luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca Fri Dec 24 21:23:08 2004 From: luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca (Bee Chase) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 16:23:08 -0500 (EST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Did Snape Try to Warn James at GH? (Re: Here is an interesting Snape one) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041224212308.13270.qmail@web52007.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120569 > Potters location? > Valky: > Ohhh yes Easy Kneasy!, Snape is doing his spy work glued fast to > Voldys swishy cloak, when he happens upon a crumpled piece of paper > that fateful night, he craftily sneaks a peek and finds it to be a > note, written on parchment that bears the very insignia of the > Potter family itself, on it is written, "The Potters are located at > number street Godrics Hollow", of course. > And voila Snapes conclusion that the one who betrayed James was > someone so close to them he could use the Potters own parchment and > seal to do it. > Of course this way he doesn't have any idea precisely *who* it is > that wrote the note, but it does seem more likely to be Sirius. > > Hey, then again, maybe the note was written on Parchment bearing the > seal of the Noble house of Black. Peter did plan to frame Sirius > from the start, I believe. Jen: Aha! The missing link. You're the crafty one, Valky ;). What time of day Snape goes to the Potters is the key. Peter betrayed their location sometime on Halloween, but we don't know how long it was between the time Peter left his secret location to tell Voldemort, and Sirius found Peter missing. Peter could eaily have left his hiding place Halloween morning, expecting to be back when Sirius checked on him that night. Instead, something blocked him from returning. So, like you postulated, Snape comes across the note Peter gave to LV disclosing the Potter's location, and Snape immediately rushes there in an attempt to get James & Lily to another location. When James refuses to believe Sirius would betray him, Snape leaves in disgust. Not long after that, LV appears. I tend to take it at face value that James was the voice Harry heard, and that if Snape did go to the Potters that night, he was gone before Voldemort showed up. We already have canon evidence from the Occlumency incident that Snape is willing to give up on a vitally important task if he is humiliated. If James humilated him at GH, Snape would most likely chalk it up to Potter arrogance and leave. Jen Luckdragon: I don't believe Peter would have anonymously sent the note. He only did things in order to save his own skin or put himself in good standing with someone who might skin him. Therefore I believe he would have made sure in no uncertain terms that Voldemort was aware he was the one giving up the info. 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 justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 24 21:24:34 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 21:24:34 -0000 Subject: Narrative technique (Was: Theoretical boundaries / Dursleys' abuse) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120570 Alla wrote: > > I believe Carol recently (or relatively recently) gave > very good description of the narrator in the books. I don't remember > the correct name for such narrator, but such narrator is not ever > completely objective. > > I think it is called limited third view narrator, but I am not sure. > The events are narrated not from Harry POV, BUT for the most part > narrator only sees events from Harry POV and identifies with him only. > > If Carol reads it, maybe she will explain it better or corrects me. Carol responds: Thanks, Alla. The technical name for this type of narrator is third-person limited, meaning that he or she writes in the third person and is therefore not the protagonist or any other character, but his or her "omniscience" is limited to the perspective of one character (or a few characters)--it's still a limited omniscient perspective when the narrator is seeing from Vernon Dursley's or Frank Bryce's perspective. But the narrator does occasionally slip outside this perspective to report events that the POV character isn't aware of (e.g., the owls and people in cloaks that Vernon can't see because his back is turned or Neville lying awake unbeknownst to Harry). Technically, a limited omniscient narrator shouldn't do that and it could be considered a flaw in the books. More important, such a narrator is, as you say, not always reliable because he's limited (most of the time) by the POV character's perspective and sometimes inadequate knowledge (e.g., reporting as fact that the Potters died in a car accident because that's what Harry thinks is true at the time). But I think Del's concern is not with the built-in limitations and occasional unreliability of this type of narrator. It's with the narrator's emotional distance from Harry in the early books, which disappears in the later books, especially OoP, where the narrator's perspective is more difficult to separate from Harry's. The narrator of SS/PS seems no more bothered by Harry's flicking a spider off his sock as he wakes up in his cupboard than by Vernon going out for lunch and nearly knocking down a small man in a violet cloak. In fact, the narator's tone here is rather like that of "Kennilworth Whisp" blithely reporting that the spectators at the annual broom race in Sweden apparated to the finish line "to congratulate the survivors" (QTA 4, a hilarious bit of understated British humor, IMO). It's no concern of Whisp's that people have died or suffered serious injuries in Quidditch matches; that's the nature of the "sport" and of the WW. (Clearly Wizards have a level of endurance far beyond that of mere Muggles since they can be struck by a ten-inch iron ball and live to play again with undampened enthusiasm!) But that comic indifference to suffering, whether Harry's or the unnamed Appleby Arrows Seeker stung by wasps, is almost entirely absent from the essentially humorless narration of OoP. If you move to OoP directly from GoF, the transition is nearly invisible (though Harry himself seems different). But if you jump from SS?PS to OoP, it's immediately noticeable. If anyone's interested in this topic, here's a link to one of my earlier posts on the topic of the limited omniscient narrator: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/116981 My apologies for not having changed the subject line of that post to reflect the content. Carol, noting that Ingolfr the Iambic writes in (flawed) anapestic tetrameter, not in iambic anything, at least as "translated" by "Kennilworth Whisp" From chnc1024 at AOL.COM Fri Dec 24 22:16:08 2004 From: chnc1024 at AOL.COM (chnc1024 at AOL.COM) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 17:16:08 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Did Snape Try to Warn James at GH? (Re: Here is an intere... Message-ID: <8e.1d3da5a1.2efdef28@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120571 In a message dated 12/24/2004 1:08:51 PM Pacific Standard Time, eloiseherisson at aol.com writes: Eloise: Only the Secret Keeper can reveal the location, but I don't think we've established what happens once he does. Is the Charm thereby completely broken? Does it mean that from that point onwards, the secret is not magically protected from *anyone* or that only the person who has been directly told has access to it? ******************************************************************** Chancie: Sirius said in OoP, that Dumbledore was the secret keeper for the order, and that's why he had to write the location for it. The information can be passed on ONLY by the secret keeper, otherwise Moody, Tonks, Lupin or any of the other's in Harry's guard could have simply told him it's location once they arived. Chancie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 24 22:06:29 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 22:06:29 -0000 Subject: Is this the post that we think was from JKR? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120572 moonmyyst quoted this post from mooseming: > > IMO (should be H but I'm still working on that!), the final showdown has to be at Hogwarts. > > I find this very hard to justify because it simply feels right. In > no particular order here are my 'reasons': > > > > It is the spiritual home for the main protagonist, antagonist and > for DD (the narrator). > > This is a coming of age story, traditionally this is marked by a > > symbolic change of state e.g. getting married, becoming a king, > dying (don't panic), and in this case graduating (I think). > > > > Most compelling for me however is that it is the place where the > books and the story truly come alive, Hogwarts is the single most > > charismatic 'character' in the books, it lives, has secrets both > good and bad, has a past and internal conflict. To me Hogwarts 'is' JKR, it shares her sense of humour and generous nature. > > > > Regards > > Jo > moonmyst commented: > Notice how it is signed?? > > Carol responds: Yes, but I also notice that she refers to the author as JKR and to DD as the narrator--that last is a glaring error and IMO makes it impossible that "Jo" is JKR. Nor do I think she would refer to her own "humour" and "generous nature." Just my opinion! Carol From khinterberg at yahoo.com Fri Dec 24 23:44:38 2004 From: khinterberg at yahoo.com (khinterberg) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 23:44:38 -0000 Subject: Was Snape lurking in PoA or was he on his way to meet with Peter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120573 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "vmonte" wrote: > > vmonte writes: > > In PoA Harry sees Peter's name on the map and goes looking for him > inside the school. Is it possible that Snape was on his way to > rendezvous with Peter but was accidentally caught by Harry? > > vmonte Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't that only happen in the movie, and not in the book? khinterberg From bboyminn at yahoo.com Fri Dec 24 23:01:11 2004 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 23:01:11 -0000 Subject: Can Occlumency be taught ? Yes ........ and No. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120574 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > Del replies : > > > > Could it be simply because Occlumency cannot be taught? > Snape describes it as "an obscure branch of magic, but a highly > useful one". ... > > > Alla: > > > Well, sure our lack of knowledge is one of the main problems in > evaluating whether Snape taught Occlumency correctly OR as you put > the question "Whether it could be taught at all" > > I tend to think that it could be taught, because Dumbledore > insisted that Snape TAUGHT Harry occlumency, but of course we don't > know what conversation Dumbledore had with Snape prior to starting > lessons. > > ...edited.. > > What am I getting at? Oh, yes. This way of teaching smells TO ME of > Voldemort's way of teaching and I hope that occlumency can be taught. bboyminn: Just call me Shades O'Gray. I think too often our arguements/discussions get trapped in black and white, and we fail to see that life is really all about shades of gray. On the subject of Snape; Evil/Not, Good/Bad, etc..., we forget that it's possible for both sides to be right. Snape appears to be good, although he is not nice. Snape has been seriously bad, and still, in his own less than evil way, he can still be bad. We all have this duality about us; we've all been bad and good, nasty and nice, rude and polite, and will likely do so again. Snape is just a far more interesting and not quite resolved duality. That's what makes him such a facinating character; he is everything and he is nothing. To view and understand the full character, we need to blend the ups and downs, and smooth the blacks and whites into shades of gray, and thereby determine whether the character's gray leans more toward the lighter side or the darker side. I'm reminded of the old parable of several Blind wisemen trying to describe an elephant; one says the elephant is like a snake, the other--like a rope, another-- like a wall, and the last--like a tree. It all depends on whether you are examining the trunk, tail, body, or leg. How you define Snape depends on what aspect of him you are looking at. Now the shades of gray for Occlumency. Like nearly everything in life, Occlumency is a blend of skill and talent. Anyone can be taught the skills necessary to be a passible artist or musician, but only a rare few have the talent to really excel at it; to be true artists or true musicians. Students are, or maybe, taught the rudimentary skills of Occlumency and resistance to the Imperius Curse, or at least, be made aware of the possibility. Some may even be able to demonstate these skill in the classrrom, but would be unable, or of limited ability, to resist under stressful circumstance. Harry on the other hand has demonstrated, both in the classroom and out, the ability to throw off the Imperius curse. Logically, he has, and has demonstrated, similar skills with Occlumency. Others may be taught within limits, but Harry has a true talent. As far as Snape and Occlumency, I suspect Snape became aware that he had a natural talent for this as he grew. Snape seems like an emotionally guarded person. I can picture him closing himself off when he sensed someone was trying to get a 'read' of him, and I mean this in the more general sense. This tendency to guard his emotions may have been what lead him to become aware the he had a far more than average ability to do this. Keep in mind that 'guarding your emotions' has more to do with hiding a sense of vulnerability than with keeping your anger in check. Later, one could assume that he formally became aware of Occlumency either through conversation or research. Once he was aware that it was a honeable skill, he may have worked at it. Indeed, at some point, he may have even had someone assist him in refining his skills. Or that someone may have recognised his skill, and helped him develope it for a specific purpose, like spying. To the question, why would Voldemort teach Occlumency to Snape. This has already been answered; so Snape could join the good side and spy on Dumbledore for Voldemort. I have concluded that the only way Snape could successfully rejoin Voldemort, is if Voldemort sent Snape to Dumbledore as a spy. That allows Snape to now stay close to Dumbledore wtih Voldemort's knowledge, and yet return to Voldemort pretending to still be spying for him, and to do so with Dumbledore's knowledge. That makes Snape a double agent, he is working both sides against the other. At this point, he appears to us to be truly aligned with Dumbledore, but only time will tell for sure. I have yet to hear any other explanation that allows Snape, at this point in time, to effectively have access to both sides. So can Occlumency be taught? Yes, but only to a limited degree. Once again, through the duality of life, everyone is right; just not absolutely right. Just a few thoughts. Steve/bboyminn (was bboy_mn) From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Sat Dec 25 03:01:22 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2004 03:01:22 -0000 Subject: Did Snape Try to Warn James at GH? (Re: Here is an interesting Snape one) In-Reply-To: <20041224212308.13270.qmail@web52007.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120575 > > Potters location? > > > Valky: > note was written on Parchment bearing > the seal of the Noble house of Black. Peter did plan to frame Sirius from the start, I believe. > > Jen: > So, like you postulated, Snape comes across the note Peter gave to LV disclosing the Potter's location, and Snape immediately rushes there in an attempt to get James & Lily to another location. > > Luckdragon: > > I don't believe Peter would have anonymously sent the note. He only did things in order to save his own skin or put himself in good standing with someone who might skin him. Therefore I believe he would have made sure in no uncertain terms that Voldemort was aware he was the one giving up the info. > Valky: I see your point, Luckdragon. Though, consider, this line from Snape's worst memory. " 'Put that away will you' Sirius said finally......... 'before Wormtail wets himself with excitement.' and consider Sirius attitude to Kreacher. It is small but there is some indication that Sirius was not *nice* to his friend Peter, for the most part. And so perhaps Voldemort was amenable to the mutual benefit for both himself, and Peter of framing Sirius for the betrayal. Furthermore, there was always the possibility that, if it were a note, it could find its way to Dumbledore instead of Voldy, which would spell the end of Voldie's ability to spy on the order if it implicated Peter. Besides Peter had been the Order mole in the ranks for a long time, surely LV knew who sent the note. From cleverestwitchofherage at yahoo.com Fri Dec 24 15:08:48 2004 From: cleverestwitchofherage at yahoo.com (cleverestwitchofherage) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 15:08:48 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries / Dursleys' abuse In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120576 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: Carol: > The "Uranus" joke in PoA would be out of place in > OoP, for example, not just because the main characters are older but > because the situation is darker and direr. ... > But absolute consistency in narrative > technique is probably rare. Look at "Moby Dick," for example, and the > problems Melville experienced when he realized the limitations of > having a common sailor as the POV character. He resorted to > Shakespearean soliloquies and similar devices so that Ishmael could > hear Starbuck's thoughts and then finally gave it up and used a > third-person omniscient narrator. The narrative technique is > inconsistent and seriously flawed, and yet the book remains a masterpiece. Clever Witch: Hi,Carol, I always enjoy your posts--well thought out, civil, reasonable, and well expressed--and I too am interested in point of view. Many authors have said it was the key to their works, (though I doubt it is such in HP). But I do feel the need to respond to a couple of things you mentioned. (See snippets above.) First: Ron *does* repeat the Uranus joke in the Department of Mysteries; (p. 708 in OOP, "Beyond the Veil," British edition) he tells Harry he had just seen "Uranus up close." But because of the desperate situation in which the DA members are in, running from the DEs, you're right--it's *not* funny! It's not funny at all! It's grotesque, and to me underscores the seriousness of their plight! Second: When I reread Moby Dick as an adult, I realized three things about it that I had not caught in college. First, the narrator's name is *not* Ishmael. He's adopting the name as a sobriquet with which to tell his story. Second, (and here's the part I wanted to point out to you), he is *not* a "common sailor." He's a burned out schoolteacher! (So he would be very well-versed in Shakespeare and the King James Bible in his own right). The third realization, (one that is a bit OT, but interesting to me at least), is how funny the book is in spots. The specious reasoning that leads Ishmael to determine the only Christian thing for him to do is worship an idol had me ROFL. I don't want to argue about whether or not changes in POV are flaws or not but, as you point out so well, often they are necessary. (I tend to think multiple voices are *not* flaws, if graceful transitions are made between them, as I believe they are in HP.) Have a very Merry Christmas. Cleverwitch From a_b_desert_king at hotmail.com Sat Dec 25 04:20:58 2004 From: a_b_desert_king at hotmail.com (a_b_desert_king) Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2004 04:20:58 -0000 Subject: Snape at Godrics Hollow In-Reply-To: <142.3bc30c11.2efdedd2@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120577 > Chancie: > snip > However, James and Lily did know Voldemort was looking for them. I have a hard time believing that they would take a chance like that. I mean, ignoring a threat that could very well kill their son??? > >snip > Chancie > > Heather now: Yes Chancie, I agree. This one thing has been danced around in several posts but never actually said: Let's say that Snape knew only that the Potters had been given up to LV, and he didn't know exactly who gave LV the information because, as was suggested earlier, maybe the information was written on a piece of paper like 12GP was in OotP for Harry. Snape also read the piece of paper so he knew where to find James. Like everyone else, Snape assumed that Sirius was the SK, so Snape went to James and said 'Hey, Sirius has gone and betrayed you'. Now, James would have known that *Sirius* couldn't betray him since he had made *Peter* SK and Sirius, not being SK couldn't tell *anyone* where the Potters were hiding. So as a result James would have laughed at Snape and said he knew for sure Sirius hadn't betrayed him (without telling Snape how he knew that - since after all, he and Snape are not exactly on best buddy terms). Maybe he didn't realize at the time that Snape shouldn't have known where to find him either - otherwise that would have been a really big hint that Snape was being truthful. Now this is just a possible theory as to how Snape could have been there and James could have not listened to him. It could also explain why LV went personally to GH rather than sending his DEs (since he lost the paper and thus he was the only one who would be able to find them...). Personally, I don't believe that Snape's voice was the one Harry heard when the dementors attack because surely Harry would recognize Snape's voice. I mean, sure it's 12 years later, but Harry has to listen to Snape's voice every day in class - I wouldn't think it would have changed so much that he wouldn't recognize it.... As well, I personally believe that Snape was one of the faithful who responded to the burning of the Dark Mark in GoF and not the "One, who I believe has left me forever" (but that is a whole other subject...) and he certainly wouldn't have responded to LVs resurrection if he had been in GH as an accomplice for the Order. Heather - who is spending a dreary Christmas Evening on her computer 'cause her son is spending Christmas with his Dad.... From imamommy at sbcglobal.net Sat Dec 25 01:24:04 2004 From: imamommy at sbcglobal.net (imamommy at sbcglobal.net) Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2004 01:24:04 -0000 Subject: Harry's cupboard was Re: Theoretical boundaries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120578 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: Pippin wrote: snip > Honestly, there are millions of children in the world right now > surviving in living conditions far worse than Harry's at the > Dursleys, who have been hungry every night of their lives and > have no home at all, much less a heated, lighted cupboard, with > a mattress, access to schooling and books, glasses, television > and newspapers. Harry is deprived only in relation to the spoiled > and pampered Dudley. >snip > Pippin I think that this was the point being illustrated: that Harry had a little cupboard, or closet, and Dudley had not one, but two bedrooms full of his junk. It illustrates the difference in how they were treated. Also, Harry was never, IIRC, dissatisfied with his cupboard. He seems, IMO, to just be happy to have a sanctuary to go to. He's made it his safe place. The Dursley's don't move him until they know that the WW (DD) knows that he doesn't have a proper bedroom. At least he didn't have to share a room with Dudley! imamommy From khinterberg at yahoo.com Sat Dec 25 04:28:33 2004 From: khinterberg at yahoo.com (khinterberg) Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2004 04:28:33 -0000 Subject: Can Occlumency be taught ? Yes ........ and No. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120579 Steve wrote: > As far as Snape and Occlumency, I suspect Snape became aware that he > had a natural talent for this as he grew. Snape seems like an > emotionally guarded person. I can picture him closing himself off when > he sensed someone was trying to get a 'read' of him, and I mean this > in the more general sense. This tendency to guard his emotions may > have been what lead him to become aware the he had a far more than > average ability to do this. Keep in mind that 'guarding your emotions' > has more to do with hiding a sense of vulnerability than with keeping > your anger in check. > > First of all, wonderfully thought-out post. I definitely agree with you on almost everything. I was just wondering where, in your version, does this comment from Snape in Occlumency lessons fit in: "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, in other words--they stand no chance against his powers!" Many people tend to think Snape is speaking from experience here. This would make one assume that at one point Snape had failed at controlling his emotions around the Dark Lord...although he could have been quite good at it most of the time, as he is around Harry, but one time was so distraught over something that he let his emotions get away from him? What are your thoughts? khinterberg From willsonkmom at msn.com Sat Dec 25 04:54:31 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2004 04:54:31 -0000 Subject: Was Snape lurking in PoA or was he on his way to meet with Peter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120580 > vmonte now: snip > I do, however, find it curious that Snape calls Lupin to his office > immediately after he finds (and is insulted by) the map. In Snape's > worst memory (Snape's penseive memory) we can hear James and gang > calling each other by their marauder names. Did Snape call Lupin into > his office because he knew that Lupin was one of the creators of the > map? > >snip> > Is he accusing Lupin of giving Harry the map? Is it possible that > Snape knew about the marauders in high school? snip Potioncat: hoping she didn't snip this too much. I think Snape and possibly most of Hogwarts knew the nicknames of the Marauders. But I'm sure he didn't know about their being animagi. He didn't recognise Black as a dog in PoA. (or was that GoF?) I don't think he knew the map was a map, but only that it was made by the Marauders and could be dangerous for Harry. And, it's good to see Vmonte posting again! Potioncat From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Sat Dec 25 03:56:08 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2004 03:56:08 -0000 Subject: Is this the post that we think was from JKR? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120581 > moonmyyst quoted a post from mooseming: > > > Regards > > > Jo > > > > moonmyst commented: > > Notice how it is signed?? > > > > > Carol responds: > Yes, but I also notice that she refers to the author as JKR and to DD as the narrator--that last is a glaring error and IMO makes it > impossible that "Jo" is JKR. Nor do I think she would refer to her own "humour" and "generous nature." Just my opinion! > Valky: Hi Carol, trust you to be the voice of reason among us. :D It is good that you're willing to help us back to earth here. Yes the notion of finding the *Diamond* "post from the First Lady herself" is a bit fantasy land really, after all, it's a needle in a haystack to start with even if by chance Jo *was* a member. Though I personally don't want to dismiss it all so offhandedly, myself. and, Why is: the remarkable nature and style of the posts. My stand out examples: 1 "Jo" wrote: I believe Cho is for the chop because of the form her patronus takes - a swan. In mythology spirits of the dead may visit mortals in the form of a swan, also swans mate for life. So the patronus is a reference to Cedric and an indication that they belong together and therefore she is going to have to join him!!! >> Jo ;-) Valky: Intuitively, mostly, I see the wink here as referring directly to the above paragraph. Is this the authoritative word on ?Why on Earth? did JKR tell us now-relatively-insignificant-since-Harry-got- over-her!Cho's patronus ?? Personally I find it *feels* like the "juice" to me. another word of "Jo": > By the by I take Lupin tapping Harry's face (specifically not poking) to mean some sort of reviving charm. > Valky: "By the by" is a phrase that I recall JKR using on occasion, I don't remember where, but it really rings a bell to me. Of course couple that with the forehead slapping revelation that the tapping is a reviving charm.... (Note: *specifically, not poking*, this seems an ex officio statement to me, it doesn't say "Canon says tapping not poking" but instead has a real "*I meant* tapping, not poking feel to it. JMHO) more amazing "Jo": > Your thumbs prickle! > > JKR hide something? Not possible! > Valky: Either this Jo is JKR's separated at birth twin sense of humour or.... I really slip into fantasy land when I read this one. This is just like signature Rowling Humour, or it's a good imitation. "Jo" latches onto the thumb prickling that Kneasy threw in and played it like an irish fiddle all the way through the post. and finally the very very *Gospel* "Jo": > Old magic my son, old magic. Voldy comes from a long line of heirs > passing on their inner salazar, presumably by some old magic. Lily is protecting Harry with more vintage witchery. They come together and *bang* Valky: Now I appreciate and respect your position Carol, entirely, I recall moosemings predictions way back when they were first posted. and I recall thinking huh? where does this person conjure interhouse swap from, reaaally.... and talks like she wrote the books... I really did think that, and I dismissed the posts and thought no more of them. Fortunately, for me I have a pretty open mind and the great luck of being in the company of some brilliantly observant people on this list, they have given me a second chance to study something I glanced over hastily before, and, darn it, could have missed something!! Since it is Christmas day, I think I shall float dreamily in the ether for a while and imagine that we *are* so fortunate that JKR has dropped a few resplendent jewels in our lap *and* that they have been found. I suppose I can return to being a little skeptical when the silly season is over. :D From willsonkmom at msn.com Sat Dec 25 04:35:30 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2004 04:35:30 -0000 Subject: Did Snape Try to Warn James at GH? (Re: Here is an interesting Snape one) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120582 > > Kneasy: > > > > 1. Sirius is SK > > 2. Snape gets information that the Potters are going to be attacked > > 3. He goes to SK Sirius, who takes him to the Potters > > 4. Snape passes on the warning, Sirius rubbishes it, James sides > > with him > > 5. Snape goes back to DD, tells him what happened > > 6. Meanwhile Sirius has second thoughts and for whatever the > > reason he persuades James to swop SK with all the consequences > > that entails > > 7. *But both DD and SS believe Sirius is still SK* > > 8. Death and destruction; everybody thinks Sirius is SK, Sirius to > > Azkaban, no questions asked. > > 9. Guilt+++ from Sirius > > > > Sound reasonable? > > > SSSusan: > My only concern is how we get from 3 to 4. Why would Sirius [esp. > if he's already SK] take *Snape* TO the Potters? Given their > history with Snape, I can't think of any reason other than because > he believe Snape is right that the Potters are targets. But if > that's the case, then why does Sirius turn around and rubbish the > idea when Snape presents it to J/L? > Potioncat: I tried to read all the "Did Snape warn..." posts and I didn't see this point. I know I should have snipped, but I couldn't decide where. So here's the fly in the ointment. According to PoA, in the Shrieking Shack, Black doesn't know Snape is a teacher at Hogwarts and according to GoF, Black never suspected Snape of working for LV. It appears that Black and Snape had no contact after graduating from Hogwarts. That would also mean that Black didn't know Snape suspected him of betraying the Potters. Nor did he know that Snape warned the Potters (or at least DD) about an attack. But based on the comment Snape made in the Shrieking Shack, about James being too arrogant to believe Black would betray him, Snape had told either James or DD that Black had betrayed the Potters. Now I'm getting confused. But I'm sure of the first two paragraphs. Potioncat From moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com Sat Dec 25 01:36:23 2004 From: moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com (K G) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 17:36:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Usual cast of suspects (a few more added) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041225013623.94993.qmail@web53508.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120583 lilypo2007 wrote: Sorry for the delay to reply. I was looking for my sources in the wrong place. I don't think there was any new interview. The articles that were published on 21st december were clearly based in things that had already been announced in JKR's site. And there, in the FAQs section , here is what she says about deaths: "Are you going to kill any more characters? Yes. Sorry." http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/faq_view.cfm?id=68 Lilypo Be that as it may, I doubt very seriously that there will be new characters brought in for "canon fodder". Instead of just one, then lets whittle the list down to our top...say....5 most likely to take the eternal dirt nap. Using canon, and not just who we want to kick it, lets narrow the list down and then see just how close we are. You can also designate top 5 for book 6 and top 5 for book 7. moonmyyst --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Find what you need with new enhanced search. Learn more. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From willsonkmom at msn.com Sat Dec 25 06:00:44 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2004 06:00:44 -0000 Subject: Application for Head of House In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120584 > Carol adds: > Having just read Albus Dumbledore's delightful Foreword to QWA, which focuses on Madam Pince's shocked reaction to his request to copy QWA for Muggle readers, I think Madam P. may be a Slytherin. Either that or the WW in general is thoroughly prejudiced against Muggles and she's just expressing the view that the WW should remain hidden from our prying eyes. If that's the case, I'll go with Ravenclaw. Note her attitude that books are precious objects that should not be "pawed about, dribbled on, [or] generally maltreated," to which Dumbledore responds that such treatment is "a high compliment for any book." That protectiveness suggests Ravenclaw to me. Come to think of it, so does her reluctance to allow students into the restricted section. A Slytherin might think differently about allowing students access to Dark Magic. > Potioncat: Interesting that we look at one behavior, and one of us sees it as Ravenclaw and one of us sees it as anti-Ravenclaw. (Being protective of books.) I'll vote for Slytherin for Madam Pince. She behaves something like all the other rather unpleasant Slytherins we see in this series. But as far as the Restricted Section goes, I think that is a Hogwarts rule...according to the idea of not teaching Dark Arts. And if you think about it, the one time we see it being enforced is with a Muggle-born witch. Of course the book in question was mentioned by another Slytherin. (And I would bet that Lockhart was a Slytherin too. Even if Snape doesn't care for him.) Carol responds: > Well, I've changed the focus a bit here to focus solely on which House I think these people belonged to, but as for an HoH position being open, if DD is killed, MM will almost certainly become Headmistress, in which case, Gryffindor would need a new HoH. And Snape, though I hate to admit it, is also in danger, or will be in Book 7 (we know he won't die in Book 6), so Slytherin could need a new head as well. I don't think that Flitwick or Sprout is on the DE hit list, though I could easily be wrong. Potioncat: Well, to be honest, that was sort of what I was doing. And it's a difficult game to play. Honestly, how many of us would sort the students at Hogwarts the same way the Sorting Hat did? And at that, how many of us would agree on the houses to put students into? (I still think that Percy, Fred and George would all fit the qualifications for Slytherin. Again assuming Slytherins aren't all bad.) We may not "need to know" about a change in Head of House if there isn't a change before the end of book 7. For example, when DD was forced out and Umbridge was in charge, we weren't told who her deputy was. My guess is that the 4 Heads carried on according to their own traditions. I still think Minerva is too young to be a Head Mistress. But I'm not sure what JKR thinks. But does anyone else out there think that DD may be drafted into the Minister of Magic position? Someone else will become the Headmaster/Headmistress of Hogwarts and there will be a big change as far as the students are concerned? Potioncat From khinterberg at yahoo.com Sat Dec 25 04:15:16 2004 From: khinterberg at yahoo.com (khinterberg) Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2004 04:15:16 -0000 Subject: The Mooseming Mystery In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120585 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, imamommy at s... wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" > wrote: > > > > amanitamuscaria wrote: > > > > > > Hey, Moonmyyst - Cheers for digging those posts out! > > > Heather - is that who you meant? > > > Reading the posts on their own doesn't have the same impact - I > think > > > it seemed at the time that Jo was coming out with all this stuff, > not > > > really _from_ other postings, more like _answering_ posts? In the > > > context of speculation at the time, and I've inhabited these > pages > > > for quite awhile, I know different people generate their ideas > > > differently, but these posts just jumped off the page. > > > Must have done, to remember the handle! > > > Cheers, whoever you are, Jo! > > > > Carol responds: > > Well, we have one major clue as to her identity, the last naem > > Sturgess, which appears in her curtailed e-mail addy. Definitely > not JKR. > > > > Carol > > Hey, I'm not sure if it's her or not, but I wouldn't think she'd > use "Rowling" on her email address. That would be a bit too obvious. > > imamommy > Sturgess...Podmore...Sir Properly-Decapitated Podmore...HBP...any > connection? Iris thought outside the box about this one and wrote in post 120510: (by the way, should we read "Jo.sturgess" as "Jo points to your guess", just for the fun of making the mystery thicken?) khinterberg From martyb1130 at aol.com Sat Dec 25 01:45:57 2004 From: martyb1130 at aol.com (martyb1130 at aol.com) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 20:45:57 EST Subject: Hermione In Trouble? Message-ID: <1ea.32ae87b8.2efe2055@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120586 I do not believe that Hermione is in any trouble. Before she does anything, she plans out everything very carefully, and considers anything and everything that could happen. She has Rita Skeeter on a leash, if she decides to pull anything on Harry or Ron she can just tell everyone that Rita is an unregistered animagus. Umbridge has not been seen or heard from since she came out from the forest. Hermione is to clever to be marked, she knows what she is dealing with. MArtyb1130 From snow15145 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 24 04:33:17 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 04:33:17 -0000 Subject: JKR stands for Just Kidding, Really In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120587 Pippin: I've claimed that Jo sometimes tries to fool us in her dealings with the fans, for example, by confirming that Wormtail killed Cedric when, as I maintain, there are two characters using that name. I've been challenged to find an example of Jo deliberately misleading her fans, and now we have it. Her Christmas card states that she was just kidding when she said on her website that HBP was racing her third child into the world -- and she admits in her latest news that the book has been complete for a while (she said it was a weighty secret that it was finished.) So, she does fool us, and I stand by my theories: there are two Wormtails, one of whom is ESE!Lupin, and Snape, if he does not have links to vampires now, had them formerly. Pippin whose comprehensive ESE!Lupin essay is racing the Accio deadline Snow: I believe I found another example of JKR using her Dumbledore(ish) ways?he doesn't lie he evades the truth. The following quote however, is a very similar circumstance to the one we just encountered on JKR's web site: Gilson, Nancy. "A Fantastic Success for J.K. Rowling," Columbus Dispatch (Ohio), October 28, 1999 On her frenzied American tour, British author J.K. Rowling was signing copies of Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone when a small boy eagerly approached her. His words tumbled out in one breath: "I know what the title of your next book is. I know what it is. It's Harry Potter and the Quidditch World Cup!" Rowling, a slight woman with strawberry-blond hair, paused to recall the episode, then spoke again in her crisp British accent. "Every other time a kid has said this to me, I've said, 'No, that's a rumor; that's not the title.' But he was so pleased with himself that he thought he knew it, and he was only about 5, so I said: 'That's right. You're absolutely right.' And I thought, 'He'll deal with it later.' " The child new some substance of the book but it was not the actual title, therefore, JKR allowed the boy to believe the partial truth. Very clever, really! If any part of what is asked her, in the way in which it is asked, can be a partial truth, she can answer evasively. Snow From gbannister10 at aol.com Sat Dec 25 08:04:52 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2004 08:04:52 -0000 Subject: Comic passages in OotP (was:Theoretical boundaries / Dursleys' abuse) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120588 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: Siriusly Snapey Susan: > I'm also a bit worried about Gred & Forge's absence from Hogwarts in > HBP. Unless we get glimpses of them at work in their joke shop, > where's the levity going to come from? Geoff: I think we will get more from Minerva McGonagall. She has a very dry, penetrating sense of humour. Examples which quickly come to mind in OOTP as examples of sarcastic humour are when Umbridge visits her class and asks whether MM had received her note and the reply is '"Obviously I would have received it or I would have asked you what you are doing in my classroom,"said Professor McGonagall, turning her back firmly on Professor Umbridge. Many of the students exchanged looks of glee.' (OOTP "The Hogwarts High Inquistor" p.286 UK edition). Then in the same chapter, MM (in a cold fury according to canon) berates DU saying that the latter cannot gain an idea of MM's teaching methods if she comntinues to interrupt her. (ibid. pp.286- 287). And, of course, in the careers interview with Harry, there are the "cough drop" exchanges and her put down to Umbridge about Harry's marks from a competent DADA teacher. (OOTP "Careers Advice" pp.584-585 UK edition) Although Minerva is annoyed in some of these instances, there is a very dry humour in her coments and I suspect that she is "playing to the gallery" knowing that students are overhearing the exchanges and that they will go the rounds in the Common Rooms and perhaps become the stuff of Hogwarts legend.... From gbannister10 at aol.com Sat Dec 25 08:10:52 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2004 08:10:52 -0000 Subject: The Mooseming Mystery In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120589 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, imamommy at s... wrote: > > Carol: > > Well, we have one major clue as to her identity, the last naem > > Sturgess, which appears in her curtailed e-mail addy. Definitely > not JKR. > > > > Carol > > Hey, I'm not sure if it's her or not, but I wouldn't think she'd > use "Rowling" on her email address. That would be a bit too obvious. imamommy: > Sturgess...Podmore...Sir Properly-Decapitated Podmore...HBP...any > connection? Geoff: I agree that she would use another name - after all, how many stars use stage names? Secondly, I thought about Podmore, but the spelling is different - Sturgis against Sturgess, which could be meant to mislead of course..... From elsyee_h at yahoo.com Sat Dec 25 10:42:37 2004 From: elsyee_h at yahoo.com (Tammy) Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2004 10:42:37 -0000 Subject: Comic passages in OotP (was:Theoretical boundaries / Dursleys' abuse) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120590 > *snipped all of Carol and large parts of SSSusan* > > SSSusan: > I'm also a bit worried about Gred & Forge's absence from Hogwarts in > HBP. Unless we get glimpses of them at work in their joke shop, > where's the levity going to come from? > Tammy: I think Ginny is well on her way to being a decent substitute for F&G, She's even referred to as following in their steps somewhere in OotP (I think, and it's way too early to attempt to look it up). She's been progressively playing a larger role in the books, and she seems to have a keen understanding of how to lighten Harry's mood throughout OotP. I'm also hoping that Luna will not disappear in HBP and will add her own unique brand of humor to the situation. She seems to have come out of nowhere, and we know what generally happens with those characters in JKR's world. -Tammy, who secretly hopes that Ginny seals Harry's entrance officially into the Weasley family :D From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Sat Dec 25 10:27:59 2004 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2004 10:27:59 -0000 Subject: Comic passages in OotP (was:Theoretical boundaries / Durs... In-Reply-To: <42.5f51a052.2efdfdef@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120591 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, yellows at a... wrote: > In a message dated 12/24/2004 6:15:25 PM Eastern Standard Time, > susiequsie23 at s... writes: > > > You're right, of course, that they were fewer and farther between, > > as befit the more serious matters at hand &Harry's angrier tone in > > OotP. But I, for one, was very grateful for those brief humorous > > moments we received. > > > > How about the very funny scene in which Harry explains that he kissed Cho? > Ron asked him how it felt, and Harry answered, "Wet." Then he realized how > strange that sounded and told Ron that Cho had been crying. So Ron asked if Harry > is that bad a kisser. :) > > I found plenty of humor in OoP. It was just told in ways that fit the darker > situations and older characters. > > Brief Chronicles > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Hickengruendler: I thought OotP was the funniest of all books. At least it was the one where I laughed the most. Here a few examples: - Harry exchanges with the Dursleys (especially Uncle Vernon) in the first two chapters. "Ministry of Magic? People like you in the government? No wonder the country is going to the dogs". - The twins pranks. And I'm normally not that much a fan of them, but I found them really delightful in OotP and against Umbridge. Same goes for Peeves. - And, related to this, of course the twins great escape. - Lockhart's appereance - It may be just me, but I found Kreacher also, very funny and entertaining. - Trelawney predicting Umbridge's doom. - Trelawney's behaviour when she learned that she was on probation. ("You know what to do. Or am I such a substandard teacher that you never learnt how to open a book?") - Trelawney's prediction after the QUibbler interview. - All the teachers reaction towards Umbridge and especially - McGonagall. Awesome. She rocked. "I should have made my meaning plainer. He has gotten high marks in all his DADA-tests set by a competent teacher". "Cough drop, Dolores?" Ha. - The Dursleys and the Order (especially Vernon and Moody) at the end of OotP. - Luna Lovegood's comments. - Moody's and Tonks' interaction in the cahpter "The Advance Guard". I found all of this, and much more, very funny. Hickengruendler From R.Vink2 at chello.nl Sat Dec 25 13:03:24 2004 From: R.Vink2 at chello.nl (Renee) Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2004 13:03:24 -0000 Subject: Character Discussion: James In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120592 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > > > > Alla: > > > > Could you please educate me a little bit, since although I am > > fascinated with this kind of imaginary, I am not really familiar > > with it? > > > > Is stag a biblical symbol for the Water of life and "stag" > > and "hart" are the same thing? > > > Geoff: > A stag is the male of a large deer, especially the red deer and a > hart is a male deer, escpecially a red, usually after its fifth year. > > OT, you may be interested to know that I see these deer almost every > day when walking my dogs. Exmoor has one of the largest herds of red > in the UK. > > One interesting thing which always occurs to me is that Harry's > Patronus is the same as his father's Animagus form; I wonder what > James' Patronus was? Or have I missed this somewhere? > > In Christianity, the stag has no symbolism. The comparison in the > psalm is that we, the seekers, are like deer looking for water. The > same Psalm, in the New International Version, which I tend to use > reads: > > "As the deer pants for streams of water, so my soul pants for you, O > God" > Renee: In the medieval Church the stag was sometimes used as a symbol for Christ Triumphant (like the unicorn symbolised the purity of Christ and the Phoenix the Resurrection). In Catholic iconography this stag is often found in pictures of St. Hubert, encountering a majestic stag with a cross between its antlers while hunting in the forest - an experience which led to Hubert's conversion, if I recall the story correctly. After and because of the Reformation, most of this symbolism was lost to Protestantism. But I wouldn't be surprised if JKR, though a member of the Church of Scotland, knew what the stag stood for in the medieval Church. She's obviously fond of animal symbolism. Renee (wishing people a happy Christmas) From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Sat Dec 25 16:51:26 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2004 16:51:26 -0000 Subject: Comic passages in OotP (was:Theoretical boundaries / Durs... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120593 > Hickengruendler: > > I thought OotP was the funniest of all books. At least it was the one > where I laughed the most. > > Here a few examples: Neri: Good to see I'm not the only one thinking so. I won't go as far as labeling OotP the funniest, but there's no denying that JKR has kept OotP comical to amazing length. Even the battle with the DEs in the DoM has many comical moments in it. Even Nevill's torture and his bravery are slightly funny because of his broken nose speech. The only place where the humor stops is in the two chapters following Sirius' death (and even then not completely ? see the past headmaster portraits horrified at Harry's conduct and Nigellus advising DD not to try understanding the students) and then, as Hickengruendler noticed, the humor appears again in the last chapter. I agree of course that there is a big change in tone from SS/PS to OotP, but I don't think it is in the humor. It is more in the length and level of detail. The first books are short and stringy on details, which gives a tone of (as Lupinlore termed it) a modern fairytale, while the last two are so long and detailed that they are practically epic. This is similar to (as Carol noted) the transition from The Hobbit to the ending of LOTR. I'm writing as someone who, at first, also found GoF and OotP too long and too melodramatic. I originally thought that JKR is best at telling modern fairytales and should have stuck with that tone. But now I realize that it wasn't likely. To take Lupinlore's excellent example of the abuse of Hansel and Gretel, suppose you were writing a 7 books saga about Hansel. Getting away from the evil witch (erm... hag) would be the first book when Hansel is 11, and then you'd write six more books, each telling a year of Hansel's life until he is 17. Would you have kept the strict fairytale tone in all seven books? I guess you could, and in the seventh book Hansel could save the kingdom from the honcho dragon and marry the king's daughter, but this would already get repeating and boring in the forth book, and also not reflecting the hero's development. JKR didn't have much choice but to change the tone. I agree that at times she could have done it better than she actually did. Neri From cleverestwitchofherage at yahoo.com Sat Dec 25 15:06:22 2004 From: cleverestwitchofherage at yahoo.com (cleverestwitchofherage) Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2004 15:06:22 -0000 Subject: Ginny's full name. In-Reply-To: <20041224211748.22719.qmail@web52003.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120594 Brent: > That fits with other King Arthur names of Weasleys. Percy for > Percival, Arthur(obviously). Charles (Charlie), George, William > (Bill) are all kings in England as well. I think it is kind of a > royal/Arthur legend. I don't know how Molly or Ron would fit that > scheme but maybe she just picked name she like and we're all crazy > looking for meaning in them. > Luckdragon: > Ginevra is a form of Guinevere as noted above. It means "fair one". > > Molly is a form of Mary and means "perfect one" and is also a > royal name. > > Ronald means "mighty, powerful". Cleverwitch: As a child, I read a book called The 13th is Magic in which a character named Ronald *becomes* Childe Roland [who] to the darke tower came. The point was made in this book that Ronald is an anagram of Roland. In this respect, Ronald too is a "royal" name. Wasn't Roland the son of Charlemagne? BTW both Harry (Henry) and James are also royal names, aren't they? Happy Holidays everyone, Cleverwitch (who hardly ever posts, but enjoys reading what others on this brilliant site have to say) From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Sat Dec 25 19:10:18 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2004 19:10:18 -0000 Subject: Death Eaters In-Reply-To: <007501c4e9dc$c9c58ae0$6701a8c0@MITRE.ORG> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120595 > Neri wrote: > > > ***************************** > > GoF, Ch. 9: > > the Dark Mark hovering over your house, and knowing what you're > >about to find inside.." Mr. Weasley winced. "Everyone's worst > >fear. The very worst." > > ***************************** > > > > Everyone's worst fear, a boggart maybe? > > Carol responds: > Forgive me for saying this so bluntly, but a boggart *in itself* isn't > "everyone's worst fear." > > > charme: > > I don't believe I had such a literal interpretation of Neri's boggart > comment, Carol. I think Neri meant that it could be a form of a boggart for > some individuals: it's not inconcievable that when the Dark Mark appeared > at some regularity it could have been some wizards' worst fears. Neri: Thanks Charme :-) To clarify, I was referring to a theory that was recently suggested here (I regret that I don't remember who it was and I didn't manage to find the post). This theory pointed out in the "years of terror" in VW1 the boggart of most wizards was probably Voldemort. According to my slightly different version Arthur words "everyone's worst fear" practically imply that during VW1 the boggart of most wizards would take the form of the Dark Mark. The question is, does it lend a boggart more power if more wizards are more afraid of it? We don't have much canon that this is so, but we do see that Lupin's boggart doesn't affect him as the real full moon does, while Harry's boggart for a time does affect Harry as a dementor. So what happens to a boggart that many people fear very much from? Does it become the real thing? Does it become very powerful? Only a speculation, of course, but it reminds me of Valky's theory that Voldemort's power comes from wizards' fear to say his name. The expressions "the worst fear" and "the worst memory" tantalizingly repeat throughout the HP saga. Another example I forgot in my original post: dementors make you live again your worst memory, and the OotP pensive scene is (according to the chapter's name) "Snape's worst memory". My gut feeling is that somehow all this must link together and play a central role, but I fully admit I don't understand how. Neri From entropymail at yahoo.com Sat Dec 25 19:43:37 2004 From: entropymail at yahoo.com (entropymail) Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2004 19:43:37 -0000 Subject: JKR stands for Just Kidding, Really In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120596 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "snow15145" wrote: > > Pippin: > > I've claimed that Jo sometimes tries to fool us in her dealings > with the fans > Her Christmas card states that she was just kidding when she > said on her website that HBP was racing her third child into the > world -- and she admits in her latest news that the book has > been complete for a while (she said it was a weighty secret that > it was finished.) > Snow: > > I believe I found another example of JKR using her Dumbledore(ish) > ways?he doesn't lie he evades the truth. Entropy: So true, so true! I've maintained for a long time now that Sirius' death was faked. There are *so* many clues (Janus Thickey, headless hats, Luna's "they always come back", etc.) that lead me to believe that, not only will we see Sirius again, but that he will be alive and well. But JKR seems to have really muddied things up when she said things like no one comes back once they are "properly dead" (is Sirius properly dead??). And don't even get me started on the story of her sobbing as she wrote Sirius' death scene! I've got it in my head (quite stubbornly, I admit) that that story of her writing the scene and then discussing it with her husband was a lovely way of putting the certainty of Sirius' death into our hearts, and making it as real for us as it is for Harry. But, to paraphrase Luna, we just have to have faith that things will turn out alright, especially when they seem to be at their bleakest. None of this is to say, of course, that I actually *want* JKR to tell us the absolute and un-fudged truth. What fun would that be? I can envision JKR, after all has been said and done, and the last book has been written, saying something to the effect of "Erm, sorry, but I knew you'd forgive me a bit of fudging once you knew the whole story. It was important that the reader truly believe ...such and such...." And, of course, we will forgive her! From ibotsjfvxfst at yahoo.co.uk Sat Dec 25 20:30:53 2004 From: ibotsjfvxfst at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?Hans=20Andr=E9a?=) Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2004 20:30:53 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Character Discussion: James Message-ID: <20041225203053.85379.qmail@web25110.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120597 Alla wrote: Do you think that James was always searching for the meaning of life or younger James is not really concerned with the meaning of life? Hans: I believe that Jo is personifying forces that a person who wants to return to God encounters. James is not a real person but the personification of a longing that drives a person to seek. So I think the answer is yes. That doesn't mean James was necessarily a nice person. We know he did some horrible things to Snape. To have the longing to return to the Potter of the Universe you don't have to be a nice person. But you do have to have a Lily and a James. Alla: Since I am of the opinion that younger James took quite an active stance against the Dark Arts, although we don't know much about it, I wonder what you think. Hans: I think Jo is personifying the seeking for Light in James. Please note that Snape is also a seeker, but he personifies the aspect in the seeker which hopes to find liberation through occultism, which is symbolised in Harry Potter by the Dark Arts. So to me it is obvious that James and Severus symbolise opposite forces. James is the seeker for Divine Light, Snape is the seeker for liberation of the earthly self, which is impossible. If you can be patient you can wait till I post my thoughts on Snape. If you can't, got to http://groups.yahoo.com/group/harrypotterforseekers/message/365 and read my post about Snape. Alla: Could you please educate me a little bit, since although I am fascinated with this kind of imaginary, I am not really familiar with it? Is stag a biblical symbol for the Water of life and "stag" and "hart" are the same thing? Hans: Geoff has answered this question beautifully, for which I thank him. He is also right, in my humble opinion, about Christ being the one to give the Living Water. We might just disagree ever so slightly about who or what Christ is. To be able to understand what I mean you have to have a new vision of the structure of the universe. This is all my opinion, of course. I'm not saying it's a fact, Amanda Geist. :) I'll try to keep it as simple as possible. There are TWO universes. One is the Universe of the Potter. That universe is totally perfect and life there is of the utmost happiness. The other universe is the one we live in. It is finite, temporary and full of suffering, sorrow and death. It wasn't part of the Divine Plan but is a degenerated part of the original universe. Logically, assuming the above is correct, there are also two types of human beings: the perfect, imperishable only begotten Sons of the Potter, and the fallen human beings who are subject to death and reincarnation, but who nevertheless have the chance to return to the other universe by means of a process of alchemical transformation, described as "turning lead into gold". This process of turning lead into gold requires a force that cannot be found in this universe, but has to come from the other universe. That force is called "The Living Water". What you have to understand is that the Potter of the Universe provides a sustaining power to all creatures in the divine universe. This is sometimes called the River of God. Life in the original universe is not physical and is totally unlike earth, so the only way to describe it is to use symbols. The River of God is a stream of astral substance that is omnipresent and comes directly from the Original Spirit. If a person wants to return to the original universe, called "The Kingdom of Heaven" in the New Testament, he must start drinking the Living Water from the River of God. His "James" must thirst for the Living Water. However the pure water from the River of God is a force of an extremely high vibration. If we drank that we would be destroyed by the intensity of the power. It would be like trying to drink molten lava. However the Potter of the Universe loves his creatures and he will never forsake them. He has therefore created a mighty Spirit who can reduce the vibration and power of the Living Water so that a mortal human being can tolerate it and drink it, provided his Lily is awake and his James thirsts for it. That mighty Spirit, in the teachings of liberating alchemy, is called Christ. He is obviously the son of God, because God created him for the benefit of redeeming humanity. Geoff is right in saying He gives us the Living Water. When we drink this, i.e. when it enters our heart thirsting for God, it gives birth to a new soul, called Jesus, or Harry, or Briar Rose, and this starts a process of alchemical transfiguration, where the old earthly personality sacrifices himself (which Paul calls "dying daily") and the new human being rises up like a phoenix, eternal, immortal, and perfect. The process is described in minute detail, but symbolically, in "The Alchemical Wedding of Christian Rosycross", published in 1616. It is my deeply held belief that Harry Potter is a new version of the same story. I will explain all this in more detail in future posts. Next week I will start on Voldemort. I warn you: it's not pretty! Thanks for your questions and feel free to keep asking until everything is as clear as crystal. Hans ===== Hans Rieuwers see you at Harry Potter for Seekers http://groups.yahoo.com/group/harrypotterforseekers/ ___________________________________________________________ ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From bob.oliver at cox.net Sat Dec 25 21:47:50 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2004 21:47:50 -0000 Subject: Harry's cupboard was Re: Theoretical boundaries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120598 > Honestly, there are millions of children in the world right now > surviving in living conditions far worse than Harry's at the > Dursleys, who have been hungry every night of their lives and > have no home at all, much less a heated, lighted cupboard, with > a mattress, access to schooling and books, glasses, television > and newspapers. Harry is deprived only in relation to the spoiled > and pampered Dudley. > ONLY in relation to Dudley? Well, not really. Most kids don't have to endure the type of serious bullying Harry endured, or the kind of neglect, or the lack of nuturing. Even Dumbledore remarks on this in his speech at the end of OOTP. True, many kids have it worse than Harry. But I'm not sure what your point is. Are you arguing that Harry was not neglected and abused? That is, IMO, insupportable, although it is of course IMO. Are you arguing that what was done to Harry was in some way less wrong because some other kids had worse things done to them? I'm not trying to be argumentative, but I really don't get your point. > It occurs to me that if ten year old Harry is in his cupboard all the > time, the only reason there are spiders in there is because > Harry tolerates them -- otherwise he could sweep them out. > Only if permitted to do so by the Dursleys. Lupinlore From alexisnguyen at gmail.com Sat Dec 25 21:50:25 2004 From: alexisnguyen at gmail.com (Alexis) Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2004 16:50:25 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Hermione In Trouble? In-Reply-To: <1ea.32ae87b8.2efe2055@aol.com> References: <1ea.32ae87b8.2efe2055@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120599 MArtyb1130 wrote: > I do not believe that Hermione is in any trouble. Before she does > anything, she plans out everything very carefully, and considers > anything and everything that could happen. She has Rita Skeeter on > a leash, if she decides to pull anything on Harry or Ron she can > just tell everyone that Rita is an unregistered animagus. Umbridge > has not been seen or heard from since she came out from the forest. > Hermione is to clever to be marked, she knows what she is dealing with. That reminds me of the phrase "The best laid plans of mice and men oft go awry." No matter how well-thought out Hermione's plans are, she is still human and fallible, and as a writer, JKR has to realize that she must make Hermione seem that way before risking Hermione's character seem flat and too god-like. As it is, Hermione's character already bears certain resemblances to a deus ex machina character, miraculously coming up with answers from seemingly nowhere. ~Ali From bob.oliver at cox.net Sat Dec 25 22:06:23 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2004 22:06:23 -0000 Subject: Is this the post that we think was from JKR? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120600 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > Carol responds: > Yes, but I also notice that she refers to the author as JKR and to DD > as the narrator--that last is a glaring error and IMO makes it > impossible that "Jo" is JKR. Is is necessarily a glaring error? We do not know yet what place the "Potter" books occupy *in their own universe.* LOTR, after all, is supposedly culled from the Red Book of Westmarch, being the writings of Bilbo, Frodo, and Sam. Perhaps the HP books occupy a similar place in the Potterverse, being memoirs written by Dumbledore. In that case Dumbledore would be the "narrarator," i.e. the fictional author, whereas JKR would be the author, i.e. the real author. I'm not arguing for that interpretation. However, it is perfectly possible and it does provide an answer for how Dumbledore might correctly be called the narrarator and JKR the author. As for JKR referring to herself (and praising herself), if she wrote the post it could just be a joke, a way of poking fun in her own direction. Once again, not arguing for that, but it is at least possible and somewhat plausible. Lupinlore From gbannister10 at aol.com Sat Dec 25 22:56:02 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2004 22:56:02 -0000 Subject: Character Discussion: James In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120601 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Renee" wrote: > Renee: > In the medieval Church the stag was sometimes used as a symbol for > Christ Triumphant (like the unicorn symbolised the purity of Christ > and the Phoenix the Resurrection). In Catholic iconography this stag > is often found in pictures of St. Hubert, encountering a majestic > stag with a cross between its antlers while hunting in the forest - > an experience which led to Hubert's conversion, if I recall the > story correctly. > > After and because of the Reformation, most of this symbolism was > lost to Protestantism. But I wouldn't be surprised if JKR, though a > member of the Church of Scotland, knew what the stag stood for in > the medieval Church. She's obviously fond of animal symbolism. Geoff: Thank you for that; something of which I was not aware. Being a Protestant, I have not studied Catholic imagery and iconography as I do not feel that it represents an essential part of Christian belief. The one animal symbol which is used a lot in free church circles is that of Christ as the Lamb of God. From gbannister10 at aol.com Sat Dec 25 23:06:45 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2004 23:06:45 -0000 Subject: Hermione In Trouble? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120602 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Alexis wrote: ~Ali: > That reminds me of the phrase "The best laid plans of mice and men oft > go awry." > > No matter how well-thought out Hermione's plans are, she is still > human and fallible, and as a writer, JKR has to realize that she must > make Hermione seem that way before risking Hermione's character seem > flat and too god-like. As it is, Hermione's character already bears > certain resemblances to a deus ex machina character, miraculously > coming up with answers from seemingly nowhere. Geoff: Totally OT, but I love the Burns quote in its original Scots dialect.. "The best laid plans o' mice an' men gang aft agley" It sounds so much more understanding. I'm sure Professor McGonagall would agree wholeheartedly with me..... From lexical74 at yahoo.com Sat Dec 25 23:14:58 2004 From: lexical74 at yahoo.com (Brian Brinkman) Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2004 23:14:58 -0000 Subject: The linguistics of authorship recognition Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120603 The quest for real posts from JKR is interesting for several reasons. The "mooseming" author has a unique voice that comes across in her (or his) posts. The author writes like one who has a strong sense of her audience. Not everyone can do that. A few things worth considering: 1. "Google" Jo Sturgess. I did and found one interesting hit, an archaeologist from the UK. The writer of the Mooseming posts wrote like someone with a professional or graduate-level education. An trained archaeologist would fill the bill. I'm almost afraid to write this, but I think "mooseming" wrote like someone with a bit more education than JKR. One hitch to this comment is that the posts I saw contained a few typos and errors of omission. 2. One thing that supports the possibility of JKR being "mooseming" is that this member has been sporadic in her/his posts. Almost anyone who saw a discussion taking place regarding posts he/she authored would want to chime in and take the credit (or at least solve the mystery). Jo Sturgess could be a member who doesn't check the board very often, someone who stopped checking the board completely, or someone who is keeping a low profile. 3. It's hard to imagine JKR referring to herself in third person or using the diction "my son." The closest thing I've seen to such diction is when she has the figures outside of the staff lounge call Harry "Sunny Jim" in OOTP. 4. There are some recognized ways to do authorship recognition studies. In my own graduate work I use my faculty advisor's Vocabulary Management Profiles program to check for word usage (hapax legmena, type/token ratio, etc). The website is an academic one (that is, not for profit) and is: www.missouri.edu/~youmansc/vmp/ You might consider getting some mooseming text, then finding a bit of comparable wording from JKR, say, transcript from a chat or interview, then comparing relevant statistics. You can also do a qualitative analysis that looks at sentence structure (e.g. Does the author use lots of coordination or subordination? What kinds of punctuation show up? Are there any words/usages unusual enough to be called idiosyncratic for a particular author?). I might give this a try myself when I get tired of doing my own work or, I might just give the archaeologist Jo Sturgess and E-mail and see if she'll 'fess up! Merry Christmas! Happy Holidays! Brian Brinkman From foxmoth at qnet.com Sat Dec 25 23:24:52 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2004 23:24:52 -0000 Subject: Harry's cupboard was Re: Theoretical boundaries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120604 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lupinlore" wrote: > ONLY in relation to Dudley? Well, not really. Most kids don't have to endure the type of serious bullying Harry endured, or the kind of neglect, or the lack of nuturing. Even Dumbledore remarks on this in his speech at the end of OOTP. < > > True, many kids have it worse than Harry. But I'm not sure what your point is. Are you arguing that Harry was not neglected and abused? That is, IMO, insupportable, although it is of course IMO. Are you arguing that what was done to Harry was in some way less wrong because some other kids had worse things done to them? I'm not trying to be argumentative, but I really don't get your point.< Pippin: My point was the that cupboard, per se, is not the problem, it's the apparent lack of nurturing. We don't know how Harry managed to survive that...in its own way it's as miraculous as surviving the AK curse. Pippin previously > > It occurs to me that if ten year old Harry is in his cupboard all the time, the only reason there are spiders in there is because Harry tolerates them -- otherwise he could sweep them out. > > Lupinlore: > Only if permitted to do so by the Dursleys. Pippin: Since Harry does the cleaning, according to CoS where he says he's had plenty of practice with the Dursleys, he has access to a broom -- I was amused by Alla's protest that Harry wouldn't be able to get rid of the spiders by magic. Who needs magic to sweep out spiders? Also, since Petunia certainly wouldn't tolerate spiders anywhere else in her house, it's really hard to see where more spiders would come from, once Harry had got rid of them. Another mystery Pippin From sixsunflowers at yahoo.com Sat Dec 25 23:38:56 2004 From: sixsunflowers at yahoo.com (Bill and Diana Sowers) Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2004 23:38:56 -0000 Subject: Ginny's full name. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120605 > Molly is a form of Mary and means "perfect one" and is also a > royal name. > Molly is often a nickname for Mary but it comes from a Hebrew word (same as Miriam, Maryam) meaning "bitter" or "rebellious." Bill From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Dec 26 00:41:39 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 26 Dec 2004 00:41:39 -0000 Subject: Harry's cupboard was Re: Theoretical boundaries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120606 Pippin previously: It occurs to me that if ten year old Harry is in his cupboard all the time, the only reason there are spiders in there is because Harry tolerates them -- otherwise he could sweep them out. Lupinlore: Only if permitted to do so by the Dursleys. Pippin: Since Harry does the cleaning, according to CoS where he says he's had plenty of practice with the Dursleys, he has access to a broom -- I was amused by Alla's protest that Harry wouldn't be able to get rid of the spiders by magic. Who needs magic to sweep out spiders? Also, since Petunia certainly wouldn't tolerate spiders anywhere else in her house, it's really hard to see where more spiders would come from, once Harry had got rid of them. Another mystery Alla: LOLOL! Pippin. That is true. For some reason I was only thinking about magical possibility of getting spiders out. Don't ask me why, because I would not know the answer. :) I think Lupinlore has a point though. Dursleys told Harry what to clean and where to clean, right? Do you think they would permit him to make his living conditions more tolerable even if it involves his labor only? I think they would not allow that if only out of spite, JMO. I hope you are enjoying the holidays. Best, Alla From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Dec 26 01:01:30 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 26 Dec 2004 01:01:30 -0000 Subject: Comic passages in OotP (was:Theoretical boundaries / Durs... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120607 > Neri: Good to see I'm not the only one thinking so. I won't go as far as labeling OotP the funniest, but there's no denying that JKR has kept OotP comical to amazing length. snip. Alla: Absolutely, Neri. The humor is there and the others already quoted great examples. I was amased at how JKR managed to make humor "fit in" the darker tone of OOP, but it is definitely still there. I think she followed up on Harry's "we could all do with a few laughs", when he was giving twins his tournament winnings, very nicely. Alla From ShylahM at gmail.com Sun Dec 26 01:23:46 2004 From: ShylahM at gmail.com (Tanya Swaine) Date: Sun, 26 Dec 2004 14:23:46 +1300 Subject: More questions and HP 6&7 Message-ID: <403e946f04122517233070f5e2@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120608 All the current theories are very interesting. However a few points. Firstly, today, I was scheming OC plots, very OC plots and the memory of a phrase in COS came to mind for some reason. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ COS chapter 4, pg 43. Quote..................... "You have told me this at least a dozen times already," said Mr. Malfoy, with a quelling look at his son. "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 - ah, Mr. Borgin." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ What struck me is the last part of the sentence.............. not when most of our kind regard him as the hero who made the Dark Lord disappear................. On the surface, it could easily mean that Lucius' intention was to say that and mean something more like this. ................not when that he ruined everything and made our master, the Dark Lord disappear............................................... Inserting various threats and curses. But what if it could be split further, and there is more to Godric's Hollow than what is said here. Even if it is seemingly reinforced later. I could easily imagine that Lucius would say that, it is true that it is the common view. But how much of it is direct fact. Being very close to LV, Lucius knows lots more than he lets on, but it could be debated that only part of the sentence could be true, either by desin on his part, or a fluke. It is also good news about the next book coming out. I have to admit, I am a little nervous about reading them, but I will. The reason for that is it is prospectively going to get very nasty. LV has lost about 12-14 years, and now the baby he wanted killed is not such a baby and far less helpless than he was back in Godric's Hollow. That being the fact, LV will likely want to 'win' before Harry actually gets to maturity, and full power. In other words, he's running out of time. He could easily choose to focus on getting to Harry by any means possible, making that his main focus such as diary Tom did. That is rather than focusing on muggles and muggle borns. They could be ignored until such time as he actually won. With that, if he met Draco, and Draco sang (talked) LV would have a whole shopping list of names. Tanya From a_b_desert_king at hotmail.com Sun Dec 26 01:51:41 2004 From: a_b_desert_king at hotmail.com (a_b_desert_king) Date: Sun, 26 Dec 2004 01:51:41 -0000 Subject: The linguistics of authorship recognition In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120609 > snip > 4. There are some recognized ways to do authorship recognition > studies. In my own graduate work I use my faculty advisor's > Vocabulary Management Profiles program to check for word usage > (hapax legmena, type/token ratio, etc). The website is an academic > one (that is, not for profit) and is: > www.missouri.edu/~youmansc/vmp/ > You might consider getting some mooseming text, then finding a bit > of comparable wording from JKR, say, transcript from a chat or > interview, then comparing relevant statistics. snip > > Merry Christmas! Happy Holidays! > Brian Brinkman Hi Brian, Since I have nada to do this Christmas Day, I decided to give your site a try. I'm not sure I'm doing it right tho... I found all of mooseming's posts that I could (very interesting read for anyone who would like to see them) and took some of her text from her website Rumours and News sections. Now, this was what I got: VMP2.2: "mooseming files.txt" Interval: 55 TotalTypes=857 TotalTokens=2413 Types/Tokens=0.3552 AvgR = the ratio of Types / Tokens over the moving interval. Mean avgR = 0.35530 Standard Deviation = 0.06603 Fractal Dimension = 1.480432 If I did that right, that says to me that there is a pretty close match.... But I'm not sure I did it right.... Anyway, if you want to try it yourself I have the files here - just e-mail me and I'll happily send it to you to try. I'm really curious now.... Heather - Merry Christmas to you too! From doddiemoemoe at yahoo.com Sun Dec 26 03:12:24 2004 From: doddiemoemoe at yahoo.com (doddiemoemoe) Date: Sun, 26 Dec 2004 03:12:24 -0000 Subject: So, children series or not? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120610 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > I went to preorder the book to bn.com and on the advertisement page > it still says age range 9-12. > > Do you think it somehow supports the idea that JKR orients the books > towards the younger audience? Do you think it is only publishers > opinion? > > Alla Doddiemoe here: I think she wrote the story because she had it in her and she felt it "needed" to be told...to all who wanted to read it.. One thing I don't think many will be able to argue against effectively is that both the audience as readers and JK as a writer grow with each book...it is an intriguing process to watch, also, a one to participate in. I feel JK may have put the "age" aspect on the books after being told by those who rejected said story that there was simply no market for it.(Why change the U.K. title of "Philosophers Stone" to U.S. title of "Sorcerers' Stone" for book one....Why do the changes between the U.S. and U.K. versions become fewer and fewer with each book??) My guess would be because the audience is there and publishers as well as authors know readers will look up a word they do not know...and yes...this is more than a vocabulary thing, but I have yet to see the word sychophantic on any 9 to 12 y.o.'s spelling list...not to mention high school vocab. list..(just one word in the list of many that struck me as definitely not in the average 9 to 12 age group). I think after the first two books were published to major success....editors didn't do so much editing to target an age/cultural group, and jk continued writing the story as she first started. A universal story has appeal all around..just like a simple "Grimm Fairy Tale"...Adults keep telling their childhood favorites...children are entertained...adults tell the story so much they ponder it more and more.... True Literature, whether for adults or children can become a part of our culture.. and I believe the HP series thus far has done this.. It makes no difference who the writings were/are directed to..all that matters are those who are compelled to read it and garner something more than the "story" from it. Doddiemoe, (Who would argue that once we read something and then are compelled to share with others to such a great extent that it becomes a series of books/movies/e-groups/webpages etc..that influence our global society to such a economic/literary success it is a cultural phenomenon that must be at least looked at if not pondered deeply by all!) From imamommy at sbcglobal.net Sun Dec 26 03:26:32 2004 From: imamommy at sbcglobal.net (imamommy at sbcglobal.net) Date: Sun, 26 Dec 2004 03:26:32 -0000 Subject: Harry's cupboard was Re: Theoretical boundaries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120611 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > Pippin previously: > It occurs to me that if ten year old Harry is in his cupboard all > the time, the only reason there are spiders in there is because > Harry tolerates them -- otherwise he could sweep them out. > > Lupinlore: > Only if permitted to do so by the Dursleys. > > Pippin: > Since Harry does the cleaning, according to CoS where he says > he's had plenty of practice with the Dursleys, he has access to a > broom -- I was amused by Alla's protest that Harry wouldn't be > able to get rid of the spiders by magic. Who needs magic to > sweep out spiders? Also, since Petunia certainly wouldn't > tolerate spiders anywhere else in her house, it's really hard to > see where more spiders would come from, once Harry had got > rid of them. Another mystery > > > > Alla: > > LOLOL! Pippin. That is true. For some reason I was only thinking > about magical possibility of getting spiders out. Don't ask me why, > because I would not know the answer. :) > > I think Lupinlore has a point though. Dursleys told Harry what to > clean and where to clean, right? Do you think they would permit him > to make his living conditions more tolerable even if it involves his > labor only? I think they would not allow that if only out of spite, > JMO. > > I hope you are enjoying the holidays. > > > Best, > Alla imamommy: Interesting he never made sport of squashing them. I once had a blast on a camping trip as a child shooting a rubber band at the ceiling of my tent just to watch the caterpillers that were sunbathing on the roof go flying. But I digress. I think the spiders set up an important difference between Harry and Ron, but I'm not quite sure how =to explain it. Harry never (really) quails at most monsters; he doesn't love them like Hagrid, but he isn't too bothered with them, IMO. I think he is more fearful of terrors of the mind. Let me put it this way: take all the "stuff" in CoS, the Whomping Willow, the giant spiders, the basilisk, and yet the scariest "monsters" in the books were Tom Riddle and Lucius Malfoy. Harry doesn't really fear physical pain or death. He fears losing loved ones, losing his soul, and having his will dominated. Ron, on the other hand, has lived a fairly emotionally secure life, with a close-knit family and two loving parents. He fears more physical things: lack of temoral security (being poor), not having talent at quidditch, and spiders. So the point I'm trying to illustrate is that the spiders wind up being symbolic of the kinds of things Harry is not afraid of versus the things Ron is afraid of . And Hermione's greatest fear is failure in her pursuits of the mind. Hmm, just had another thought; do the fears the members of the Trio display represent the three basic components of humanity: mental, physical, and emotional? and do they not also each exhibit strengths in the same categories? Am I making any sense to anybody? imamommy "And if men come unto me I will show unto them their weakness. I give unto men weakness that they may be humble; and my grace is sufficient for all men that humble themselves before me; for if they humble themselves before me, and have faith in me, then will I make weak things become strong unto them." From greatelderone at yahoo.com Sun Dec 26 05:01:29 2004 From: greatelderone at yahoo.com (greatelderone) Date: Sun, 26 Dec 2004 05:01:29 -0000 Subject: Hermione In Trouble? In-Reply-To: <1ea.32ae87b8.2efe2055@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120612 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, martyb1130 at a... wrote: > > I do not believe that Hermione is in any trouble. Before she does > anything, she plans out everything very carefully, and considers > anything and everything that could happen. She has Rita Skeeter on > a leash, if she decides to pull anything on Harry or Ron she can > just tell everyone that Rita is an unregistered animagus. Umbridge > has not been seen or heard from since she came out from the forest. > Hermione is to clever to be marked, she knows what she is dealing with. GEO: And despite that she almost died in the MoM battle so her skill as a strategist doesn't compensate for the fact that she is rather lacking in battle and had to be saved by Harry and Neville. Furthermore Hermione is developing a rather subtle ruthless streak with her cursing of the DA scroll, the blackmailing of Rita and almost trying to get Umbridge killed by the centuars. If anything I expect her to get her comeuppance if she continues her present course. From khinterberg at yahoo.com Sun Dec 26 07:12:00 2004 From: khinterberg at yahoo.com (khinterberg) Date: Sun, 26 Dec 2004 07:12:00 -0000 Subject: Application for Head of House In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120613 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > snip. > > We know Hagrid was a Gryffindor...but with all the shenanigans that > go on in Gryffindor with McGonagall as Head, it would become a real > Animal House with Hagrid as Head! > more snippage. Just to start off, I would like to say that I'm definitley not disagreeing with what you have said. Rather, this just reminded me of a bit of a puzzle that I was wondering about. In July of 2000 Jo said this regarding Hagrid: A few short messages from kids before we finish. Harold Ryan who's 10 from Catford says: "What Hogwarts school house was Hagrid in?" Err you have to guess because you might be finding out at some point. http://news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/tv_film/newsid_2353000/2353639.stm But a few months later she said this: Yahooligan_seachellie4 asks: What house was Hagrid in? jkrowling_bn: Hagrid was in Gryffindor, naturally! http://www.quick-quote-quill.org/articles/2000/1000-yahooligans.html Why the change in heart over a few months' time? Is it ever said in the books that he was in Gryffindor? If not, why would it be a big deal in telling us he was in Gryffindor? Just thoughts I'm pondering. khinterberg From sixsunflowers at yahoo.com Sun Dec 26 07:23:40 2004 From: sixsunflowers at yahoo.com (Bill and Diana Sowers) Date: Sun, 26 Dec 2004 07:23:40 -0000 Subject: Hermione In Trouble? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120614 > Furthermore Hermione is developing a rather subtle ruthless streak > with her cursing of the DA scroll, the blackmailing of Rita and > almost trying to get Umbridge killed by the centuars. If anything I > expect her to get her comeuppance if she continues her present > course. The dictionary defines "ruthless" as: "Having no compassion or pity; merciless: ruthless cruelty; ruthless opportunism." Cursing the DA scroll was a calculatin measure to protect the many from the few. Revealing Rita's animagus right after discovering it would have probably sent Rita to Askaban. Hermione merely shut her up at first and then brought her back to help Harry in battling the Daily Prophet/Fudge. In the end I would guess that Rita's article brought back some of her journalistic integrity... if that word can be applied to Rita! Leading Dolores Umbridge into the Forbidden Forest was an act of desperation (preventing the cruciatus being performed on Harry which might have cost the lives of others as well), hardly well calculated and with no real goal in sight when first planned other than possibly disarming Umbridge. If anything Hermione usually reacts out of great compassion and even pity. She does not always act well, even under the best of plans. She sometimes overreacts, makes mistakes, gets too emotionally involved, but I would not call her ruthless. Bill From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Sun Dec 26 16:27:10 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Sun, 26 Dec 2004 16:27:10 -0000 Subject: Elk Vase in TBAY! The _DoH Si DoH Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120615 The sunrise over the calm blue horizon was still casting a rose- coloured haze in the sky as Val gently lifted her cast-net from the water. Ships rafts and boats alike were moored along the banks, the occupants silent, resting peacefully rocked by the gentle ebb of the tidings. The few scattered fishers like Val, stood along the beach quietly reeling in their catch. Such a peaceful day had not been in TBAY for an age, she thought, everything was so glorious today, the brilliant royal sunrise, the Jo-stling wisp that had flitted across the horizon trailing an aura of sparkle against the sky, the waves from the great sea like proud white horses galloping in and right up to the shore to touch the sand, good numbers had come up on the divining abacus in the Missouri Very Meaningful Post news, what more could possibly go right. The catch was good. Hundreds of eyes stared back at her as Val examined the net, most of it would have to go back, she figured, but there was plenty for a good breakfast. Satisfied she poured the contents of the net into her bucket. First she would reduce the many eyes down to a manageble load then, Val decided, pick some fruit to squeeze for juice to go with it, was there fruit in the bay?.... what is that?.... her sifting and emptying of the bucket had revealed a small vase, A precious vase! here in TBAY? well well now that's interesting...... Val peered in, there was something in there that looked like gold!, but then, perhaps it wasn't, she was not exclusively confidant it *was* treasure but nonetheless it was compelling, visually spectacular, rumours had spoken well of the source of these vases, and the numbers...... the numbers this morning where a positive omen, weren't they. Hesitant to put too much stock in her arithmancy skills Val pondered awhile. Her chosen trade in TBAY was painted shells, decorative flourish, custom made for various sea-vessels and stores, but business had been slow and her most popular item, the brave and the squawkers, captured barely an interest anymore. And now, here was this new inspiration, a gamble perhaps an end to the frugal living she had been making hauling in small catches on the beach, or maybe just enough to sink the struggling artist for good. Val looked from the vase to the numerous eyes waiting patiently in the bucket, and back again. "It's a dance!" ..... she tossed the entire contents of the bucket into the water....................... "The DOH Si DOH." Flopping back on the sand and ignoring her rumbling tummy Val was possessed of a greater passion. She picked up her shell and began to paint..... The Destiny Of Harry Stoically Intertwined with Destiny Of Hogwarts.. Lets Dance! Valky From bob.oliver at cox.net Sun Dec 26 16:40:54 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Sun, 26 Dec 2004 16:40:54 -0000 Subject: Harry's cupboard was Re: Theoretical boundaries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120616 Who needs magic to > sweep out spiders? Also, since Petunia certainly wouldn't > tolerate spiders anywhere else in her house, it's really hard to > see where more spiders would come from, once Harry had got > rid of them. Another mystery > > Chuckle. Good point. However, speaking purely as a homeowner who once had a spider infestation problem in one of my closets, once the little buggers find a home under the floorboards or inside the walls the only way to get rid of them permanently is an exterminator. And I can't see Vernon agreeing to that expense just to make Harry comfortable. Lupinlore From foxmoth at qnet.com Sun Dec 26 16:54:40 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sun, 26 Dec 2004 16:54:40 -0000 Subject: Harry's cupboard was Re: Theoretical boundaries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120617 > Alla: > I think Lupinlore has a point though. Dursleys told Harry what to clean and where to clean, right? Do you think they would permit him to make his living conditions more tolerable even if it involves his labor only? I think they would not allow that if only out of spite, JMO. > > I hope you are enjoying the holidays. > Pippin: Thanks and the same to all. I don't have PS/SS handy, but I am sure there's something in there about Harry sneaking out after the Dursleys go to bed to steal food from the kitchen. That shows that a) he wasn't routinely locked in and b) he wasn't totally supervised. One could speculate that Harry brought stolen food back to the cupboard to eat, and the crumbs drew flies, which in turn supported the spiders, and Harry was happy to have them since he found the spiders less annoying than the flies. Also, I took "dark" to mean windowless, not that there weren't any lights in there. As I've pointed out before, a windowless bedroom isn't a bad idea if there are wizards after you who have to be able to see you to curse you. In any case, Harry had to have a lighted place to do his Muggle school homework. Since Harry is within an inch of his father's height, his growth was not stunted -- he was just small and skinny for his age, especially if his standard of reference was Dudley. Pippin From dontask2much at yahoo.com Sun Dec 26 17:18:41 2004 From: dontask2much at yahoo.com (charme) Date: Sun, 26 Dec 2004 12:18:41 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Death Eaters References: Message-ID: <011301c4eb6e$f2b42a40$6701a8c0@MITRE.ORG> No: HPFGUIDX 120618 From: "nkafkafi" >> charme: >> >> I don't believe I had such a literal interpretation of Neri's boggart >> comment, Carol. I think Neri meant that it could be a form of a > boggart for >> some individuals: it's not inconcievable that when the Dark Mark > appeared >> at some regularity it could have been some wizards' worst fears. > > Neri: > Thanks Charme :-) > > To clarify, I was referring to a theory that was recently suggested > here (I regret that I don't remember who it was and I didn't manage to > find the post). This theory pointed out in the "years of terror" in > VW1 the boggart of most wizards was probably Voldemort. According to > my slightly different version Arthur words "everyone's worst fear" > practically imply that during VW1 the boggart of most wizards would > take the form of the Dark Mark. > > The question is, does it lend a boggart more power if more wizards are > more afraid of it? We don't have much canon that this is so, but we do > see that Lupin's boggart doesn't affect him as the real full moon > does, while Harry's boggart for a time does affect Harry as a > dementor. So what happens to a boggart that many people fear very much > from? Does it become the real thing? Does it become very powerful? > > Only a speculation, of course, but it reminds me of Valky's theory > that Voldemort's power comes from wizards' fear to say his name. > > The expressions "the worst fear" and "the worst memory" tantalizingly > repeat throughout the HP saga. Another example I forgot in my original > post: dementors make you live again your worst memory, and the OotP > pensive scene is (according to the chapter's name) "Snape's worst > memory". My gut feeling is that somehow all this must link together > and play a central role, but I fully admit I don't understand how. > chame: You're welcome, Neri :) Your post remind me of Lupin's description of boggarts in PoA and how he says that too many individual fears together can confuse it. So, I think your supposition is on the right track, as this statement would lead one to believe that a collection of wizards with the same fear could affect a boggart in some way.... charme From tonks_op at yahoo.com Sun Dec 26 20:54:04 2004 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Sun, 26 Dec 2004 20:54:04 -0000 Subject: The Mooseming Mystery In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120619 If you try to e-mail her, you will see that the e-mail is private. I have not seen one like that before. So is it her or not?? Jo who ever you are, if you are NOT her please tell us. Tonks_op From elsyee_h at yahoo.com Mon Dec 27 00:02:39 2004 From: elsyee_h at yahoo.com (Tammy) Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 00:02:39 -0000 Subject: Harry's cupboard was Re: Theoretical boundaries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120620 > > > > > > Pippin: > > Since Harry does the cleaning, according to CoS where he says > > he's had plenty of practice with the Dursleys, he has access to a > > broom -- I was amused by Alla's protest that Harry wouldn't be > > able to get rid of the spiders by magic. Who needs magic to > > sweep out spiders? Also, since Petunia certainly wouldn't > > tolerate spiders anywhere else in her house, it's really hard to > > see where more spiders would come from, once Harry had got > > rid of them. Another mystery > > > > > > > > Alla: > > > > LOLOL! Pippin. That is true. For some reason I was only thinking > > about magical possibility of getting spiders out. Don't ask me why, > > because I would not know the answer. :) > > > > I think Lupinlore has a point though. Dursleys told Harry what to > > clean and where to clean, right? Do you think they would permit him > > to make his living conditions more tolerable even if it involves > his > > labor only? I think they would not allow that if only out of spite, > > JMO. > > > > I hope you are enjoying the holidays. > > > > > > Best, > > Alla > > imamommy: > > Interesting he never made sport of squashing them. I once had a > blast on a camping trip as a child shooting a rubber band at the > ceiling of my tent just to watch the caterpillers that were > sunbathing on the roof go flying. But I digress. > > I think the spiders set up an important difference between Harry and > Ron, but I'm not quite sure how =to explain it. Harry never (really) > quails at most monsters; he doesn't love them like Hagrid, but he > isn't too bothered with them, IMO. I think he is more fearful of > terrors of the mind. Let me put it this way: take all the "stuff" > in CoS, the Whomping Willow, the giant spiders, the basilisk, and yet > the scariest "monsters" in the books were Tom Riddle and Lucius > Malfoy. Harry doesn't really fear physical pain or death. He fears > losing loved ones, losing his soul, and having his will dominated. > > Ron, on the other hand, has lived a fairly emotionally secure life, > with a close-knit family and two loving parents. He fears more > physical things: lack of temoral security (being poor), not having > talent at quidditch, and spiders. > > So the point I'm trying to illustrate is that the spiders wind up > being symbolic of the kinds of things Harry is not afraid of versus > the things Ron is afraid of . > > And Hermione's greatest fear is failure in her pursuits of the mind. > > Hmm, just had another thought; do the fears the members of the Trio > display represent the three basic components of humanity: mental, > physical, and emotional? and do they not also each exhibit strengths > in the same categories? > > Am I making any sense to anybody? > Tammy: You're making perfect sense actually. I think that JKR deliberately made each member of the trio different. Her reason for doing so could be as simple as wanting to give most of the kids someone like them to identify with. I wouldn't be surprised if their ultimate careers reflect their different strengths, or to see the three of them working together (if they all survive of course). Personally I'm hoping there's more to it than that. They are each talented in different ways, and I'm hoping that the ultimate battle with Voldemort won't be just a "Harry-thing", but require him to work with Ron and Hermione, and possibly all/most of the DA. It makes the final battle so much more rewarding to read if it takes the strengths of more than one person to finally get rid of Voldemort. -Tammy From klevasseur at earthlink.net Sun Dec 26 19:02:22 2004 From: klevasseur at earthlink.net (ms_luna_knows) Date: Sun, 26 Dec 2004 19:02:22 -0000 Subject: Snape at Godrics Hollow In-Reply-To: <20041223201705.57051.qmail@web52005.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120621 -> > > > Luckdragon: > > I have been posting the unpopular theory that the Potters were in > > possession of the P/S stone at the time of their demise. If > > Snape was there to warn the Potters it would make perfect sense that > > he would have collected the stone and taken it to Dumbledore. > > Either before or after Hagrid collected Harry Snape would have snuck > > in and retrieved the stone. > > > Ms. Luna: > > If Snape snuck in and retrieved the stone, why wouldn't he have also > taken Harry? If Snape really wanted to prove himself to DD, he would > have collected both the stone and Harry. > > Luckdragon: > > Hagrid arrived before he had the chance and Snape not yet sure what exactly had just >happened to Lord V waited and was surprised to see first Hagrid who collected Harry, >then Sirius who gave H his bike then took off after Peter. Remember there is lots of >distrust, deception and confusion. No one can be trusted until Snape is sure >Lord V is gone. Luna, But, if the theory is that Snape were there to warn the Potter's of LV's impending visit, he/ Snape would have gotten there right before LV, and would have most likely been the only one to witness the distruction of GH. I can't imagine that Snape wouldn't have figured out that everyone in the house was either dead or gone (based on Hagrid's description). At that point he would/should have been the only one there to run in and retreive the stone (if the Potter's ever had it, which I am not completely sold on) and Harry. In any event, I hope we will all learn of the events at GH in the HBP. From ShylahM at gmail.com Mon Dec 27 02:51:50 2004 From: ShylahM at gmail.com (Tanya Swaine) Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 15:51:50 +1300 Subject: More questions and HP 6&7 Message-ID: <403e946f041226185132a0ba66@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120622 All the current theories are very interesting. However a few points. Firstly, today, I was scheming OC plots, very OC plots and the memory of a phrase in COS came to mind for some reason. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ COS chapter 4, pg 43. Quote..................... "You have told me this at least a dozen times already," said Mr. Malfoy, with a quelling look at his son. "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 - ah, Mr. Borgin." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ What struck me is the last part of the sentence.............. not when most of our kind regard him as the hero who made the Dark Lord disappear................. On the surface, it could easily mean that Lucius' intention was to say that and mean something more like this. ................not when that he ruined everything and made our master, the Dark Lord disappear............................................... Inserting various threats and curses. But what if it could be split further, and there is more to Godric's Hollow than what is said here. Even if it is seemingly reinforced later. I could easily imagine that Lucius would say that, it is true that it is the common view. But how much of it is direct fact. Being very close to LV, Lucius knows lots more than he lets on, but it could be debated that only part of the sentence could be true, either by desin on his part, or a fluke. It is also good news about the next book coming out. I have to admit, I am a little nervous about reading them, but I will. The reason for that is it is prospectively going to get very nasty. LV has lost about 12-14 years, and now the baby he wanted killed is not such a baby and far less helpless than he was back in Godric's Hollow. That being the fact, LV will likely want to 'win' before Harry actually gets to maturity, and full power. In other words, he's running out of time. He could easily choose to focus on getting to Harry by any means possible, making that his main focus such as diary Tom did. That is rather than focusing on muggles and muggle borns. They could be ignored until such time as he actually won. With that, if he met Draco, and Draco sang (talked) LV would have a whole shopping list of names. Tanya From hexicon at yahoo.com Mon Dec 27 03:01:04 2004 From: hexicon at yahoo.com (Kristen) Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 03:01:04 -0000 Subject: These are interesting predictions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120623 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "M.Clifford" wrote: > > moony myst bumped to the front this message from jo - Mooseming: > > > > OK folks here are my predictions: > OWLs > Hermione will pass everything she takes, come top in everything > except: > Neville will come top in Herbology > Harry in DADA > Luna in Ancient Runes snip > > Jo again: > > > Neville however, will get an 'O' in Potion Related to these predictions: Does anyone else think that Neville is going to be a Healer? I had this thought after reading OOTP and these guesses about Neville's grades would square with it. From vmonte at yahoo.com Mon Dec 27 05:39:51 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 05:39:51 -0000 Subject: Time travel with Mirror of Erised. Was: The mirror onthe website In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120624 Alla wrote: Oh, Iris. Very interesting. Miror of Erised as time-travel device? Since I do think that time travel will play important role in the future plot and yes that Harry may attempt to go to GH, why not? It will be certainly easier to use than Time-Turner which needs to eb turned A LOT to go back that far. You know, in one of the chates the answer to the question "Will Harry be time traveling again", the answer was "Not telling". Hmmm. vmonte responds: This is very interesting! Months ago I posted a theory involving Harry being at GH (after a dream I had). At that time I posted that Harry might be confused for James at GH. Every book makes a reference regarding the physical similarities between Harry and James--except for the eyes. Someone who knew James intimately (wife, friends, Snape) would know that Harry was not James. But what about Voldemort? What if the voice at GH that Harry presumes to be of his father is really his own? Remember that Harry hears this voice during PoA when he is 13 years old. His voice would certainly be different at 18 years of age. (Harry already made this mistake during PoA when he thought that his father conjured the patronus. Is he doing it again?) And why doesn't he call his mother mom instead of Lily you say? Well, he can't really let anyone know what his true identity is, can he? Announcing that he is the grown up Harry Potter would be confirmation of time-travel meddling. This would be a big mistake. That's all Dumbledore needs is for Voldemort to know what he has been up to. From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Mon Dec 27 06:01:35 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 06:01:35 -0000 Subject: Luna gets an O in ancient runes Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120625 Those of us who have read the recent predictions of mooseming in the new light, will know that one of the very first ones is blatantly incorrect. How can Luna get an O in ancient runes if she never took an OWL? Not to be guilty of dismissing anything to hastily I have done a bit of research and I have a theory; Luna gets an Inheritance. The runic symbol O is Othila, it means homeland ancestral inheritance and a change in your future. So accordingly Luna inherits her homeland, perhaps her dad is for the chop in HBP, or her future changes, such as she becomes popular. I like this better than "OH OH that's proof that JKR never visited HPFGU" but that's just me. Best to All Valky From gbannister10 at aol.com Mon Dec 27 08:07:25 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 08:07:25 -0000 Subject: Time travel with Mirror of Erised. Was: The mirror onthe website In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120626 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "vmonte" wrote: vmonte: > What if the voice at GH that Harry presumes to be of his father is > really his own? Remember that Harry hears this voice during PoA when > he is 13 years old. His voice would certainly be different at 18 > years of age. (Harry already made this mistake during PoA when he > thought that his father conjured the patronus. Is he doing it again?) Geoff: Harry does /not/ hear a voice which might be his father's in the Dementor incident. He glimpses someone.... 'A paralysing terror filled Harry so that he couldn't move or speak. His Patronus flickered and died. White fog was blinding him. He had to fight... expecto patronum... he couldn't see... and in the distance,he heard the familiar screaming... expecto patronum... he groped in the mist for Sirius and found his arm... they weren't going to take him... But a pair of strong, clammy hands suddenly wrapped themselves around Harry's neck. They were forcing his face upwards... he could feel its breath... it was going to get rid of him first... he could feel its putrid breath... his mother was screaming in his ears... she was going to be the last thing he ever heard - And then, through the fog that was drowning him, he thought he saw a silvery light growing brighter and brighter... he felt himself fall forward onto the grass - Face down, tooweak to move, sick and shaking, Harry opened his eyes. The blinding light was illuminating the grass around him... the screaming had stoped, the cold was ebbing away... Something was driving the Dementors back... it was circling around him and Sirius and Hermione... the rattling, sucking sounds of the Dementors were fading. They were leaving... the air was warm again... With every ounce of strength he could muster, Harry raised his head a few inches and saw an animal amidst the light, galloping away across the lake. Eyes blurred with sweat, Harry tried to make out what it was... it was as bright as a unicorn. Fighting to stay conscious, HArry watched it canter to a halt as it reached the opposite shore. For a moment, Harry saw, by its brightness, someone welcoming it back... raising his hand to pat it... soemone who looked strangely familiar... but it couldn't be...' (POA "The Dementors' Kiss" pp. 281-82 UK edition) No way could Harry have /heard/ a voice which he thought was his father's. His head was filled with the Dementor-induced memories and the Patronus had been conjured from the opposite side of the lake. His assumption is based on his glimpse... He says to Hermione later that he had seen the person... "I think it was my dad." Geoff http://www.aspectsofexmoor.com Exmoor National Park views, walks and West Somerset Railway steam and diesel views (POA "Hermione's Secret" p.297 UK edition) From gretchen.bakies at prodigy.net Mon Dec 27 06:14:41 2004 From: gretchen.bakies at prodigy.net (GRETCHEN BAKIES) Date: Sun, 26 Dec 2004 22:14:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: Draco's Presence when Mrs. Norris Found Message-ID: <20041227061441.48653.qmail@web81303.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120627 I just noticed something strange while I was re-reading COS. Mrs. Norris was found on the second floor (p 105), but the Slytherin common room is down in the dungeon. So why was Draco in the crowd that surrounded Harry, Ron and Hermione? Had Lucius told his son about putting the diary in Ginny's book and he wanted to see the results? Yet later on pages 106-107, Draco denies knowing who the heir of Slytherin is and that his father didn't want him to know too much about the last time the Chamber was opened, as it would look suspicious. Also, on p 92, Harry is described as dragging his feet down the second floor corridor to Lockhart's office, but on p. 107, Lockhart describes his office as "nearest - just *upstairs*". Is this a flint? BTW, I'm using the Bloomsbury paperback edition for page references. Gretchen [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Mon Dec 27 10:19:49 2004 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 10:19:49 -0000 Subject: These are interesting predictions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120628 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kristen" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "M.Clifford" > wrote: > > > > moony myst bumped to the front this message from jo - Mooseming: > > > > > > OK folks here are my predictions: > > OWLs > > Hermione will pass everything she takes, come top in everything > > except: > > Neville will come top in Herbology > > Harry in DADA > > Luna in Ancient Runes > snip > > > > Jo again: > > > > Neville however, will get an 'O' in Potion > > Related to these predictions: Does anyone else think that Neville > is going to be a Healer? I had this thought after reading OOTP and > these guesses about Neville's grades would square with it. Hickengruendler: I think it is possible. And it would be especially nice, if he is able to cure his parents. However, I just don't think he will become a healer. Ever since reading JKR's statement that one of Harry's classmates (not Harry, not Ron and not the one we probably think about [Hermione, probably]) will become a teacher, I think she meant Neville. Especially since Harry's dream in OotP, where McGonagall is playing the bagpipes and Neville is dancing with Professor Sprout. Of course he just could have been associated with Sprout because of his love for Herbology, however, Harry's dreams often involve a lot of foreshadowing, and I'm interpreting this dream this way, that McGonagall will have the command (in other words, she'll be headmistress), and Neville will become the Herbology teacher. About the predictions: well, the part about Luna is obviously wrong (and in such an obvious way wrong, that JKR can't have made a mistake, I really don't think so). Therefore either the poster wasn't JKR, or she made some nonsense predictions on purpose. And in this case we just don't know which predictions to believe and which not. While I think that Neville will get an Owl in Potions, I really doubt that he gets an O. This is IMO as unlikely as Luna suddenly being in Harry's year. ;-) From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Mon Dec 27 13:29:55 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 13:29:55 -0000 Subject: Harry's cupboard was Re: Theoretical boundaries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120629 Tammy wrote: "I think that JKR deliberately made each member of the trio different. Her reason for doing so could be as simple as wanting to give most of the kids someone like them to identify with." Del replies: It could be. It would make me feel better for not identifying too much with Harry and much more with Ron (I'm just a normal, average person after all, I don't identify too well with over-talented heroes). Tammy wrote: " They are each talented in different ways, and I'm hoping that the ultimate battle with Voldemort won't be just a "Harry-thing", but require him to work with Ron and Hermione, and possibly all/most of the DA. It makes the final battle so much more rewarding to read if it takes the strengths of more than one person to finally get rid of Voldemort." Del replies: Amen to that !! The ending of PS/SS was one major reason I loved the book so much : because it showed that people are so much stronger when working together. Harry was alone when he faced Quirrellmort, but he would never have gotten to the Mirror Room to start with if it hadn't been for Ron and Hermione. Del From quigonginger at yahoo.com Mon Dec 27 14:11:12 2004 From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger) Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 14:11:12 -0000 Subject: Time travel with Mirror of Erised. Was: The mirror onthe website In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120630 > vmonte wrote: > > > > > What if the voice at GH that Harry presumes to be of his father is > > really his own? Remember that Harry hears this voice during PoA > when > > he is 13 years old. His voice would certainly be different at 18 > > years of age. (Harry already made this mistake during PoA when he > > thought that his father conjured the patronus. Is he doing it > again?) > > to which Geoff replied: > Harry does /not/ hear a voice which might be his father's in the > Dementor incident. He glimpses someone.... (snip quote of the Dementors going after Harry) Now Ginger: I may be wrong, in which case I apologize to the board, especially vmonte and Geoff, but I think vmonte was referring to two seperate incidences. The voice was referring to when Harry was learning the patornus, when he heard a voice he assumes to be his dad tell his mom to take Harry and run. The second was the part Geoff quoted, at which time Harry saw, but didn't hear, his dad. I took it to mean that Harry had made the mistake of thinking he was his dad before (during the Dementor attack) and could possibly have made it again under vmonte's theory of timetravelling!Harry, in which Harry goes to GH. This theory assumes that Harry had heard his own voice rather than his dad's telling Lily to take Harry and run. I think that was the mistaken identity vmonte was referring to. Please correct me if I am wrong, vmonte. Ginger Wishing everyone a Happy New Year. As of 7:00 this morning, I'm on vacation for 4 days! Woo-hoo! From Vivamus at TaprootTech.com Mon Dec 27 14:12:23 2004 From: Vivamus at TaprootTech.com (Vivamus) Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 09:12:23 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: These are interesting predictions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200412270912950.SM01040@devbox> No: HPFGUIDX 120631 > > > moony myst bumped to the front this message from jo - Mooseming: > > > > > > > > OK folks here are my predictions: > > > OWLs > > > Hermione will pass everything she takes, come top in everything > > > except: > > > Neville will come top in Herbology > > > Harry in DADA > > > Luna in Ancient Runes > > snip > > > > > > Jo again: > > > > > Neville however, will get an 'O' in Potion > > > > Related to these predictions: Does anyone else think that > Neville is > > going to be a Healer? I had this thought after reading > OOTP and these > > guesses about Neville's grades would square with it. > > Hickengruendler: > > I think it is possible. And it would be especially nice, if > he is able to cure his parents. However, I just don't think > he will become a healer. Ever since reading JKR's statement > that one of Harry's classmates (not Harry, not Ron and not > the one we probably think about [Hermione, probably]) will > become a teacher, I think she meant Neville. Especially since > Harry's dream in OotP, where McGonagall is playing the > bagpipes and Neville is dancing with Professor Sprout. Of > course he just could have been associated with Sprout because > of his love for Herbology, however, Harry's dreams often > involve a lot of foreshadowing, and I'm interpreting this > dream this way, that McGonagall will have the command (in > other words, she'll be headmistress), and Neville will become > the Herbology teacher. Vivamus: The qualifications list for Healer seemed kind of like Med school requirements, so Neville qualifying does seem surprising, but he has always excelled at Herbology, and if he gets an O in Potions (not all that surprising, if you think about it, as his fear of Snape has always kept him back there, and Potions and Herbology seem fairly closely related,) that certainly enhances his chances. In addition, he has the strongest possible motivation for becoming a Healer, and we have seen something of his strength of will. I do like him becoming an Herbologist better, though -- and who is to say that isn't the path by which the cure for his parents is found? > About the predictions: well, the part about Luna is obviously > wrong (and in such an obvious way wrong, that JKR can't have > made a mistake, I really don't think so). Therefore either > the poster wasn't JKR, or she made some nonsense predictions > on purpose. And in this case we just don't know which > predictions to believe and which not. > While I think that Neville will get an Owl in Potions, I > really doubt that he gets an O. This is IMO as unlikely as > Luna suddenly being in Harry's year. ;-) Vivamus: I've been expecting someone else to post this, but . . . Why does everyone expect that the prediction means that Luna would be taking OWLs this year? I assumed mooseming was talking about next year -- just as if she had made a prediction about Ginny's OWLs. Hmmm. Going back to look at the original post, I see that she posted it such that Luna's being tops in Ancient Runes would mean that Hermione ISN'T tops in that area. That could only be possible if they take their OWLs at the same time. Okay, now I know why no one else posted it. Junk what I just said. ;-) For those of you in British schools, is there any tradition of students taking qualifying exams (whatever you call them) ahead of their year? I.e., could a highly precocious student (as Luna clearly is) take exams in a subject a year early? It's common in American schools, but I don't see any references to such in canon, and Ginny definitely introduces Luna as being in her year. Vivamus, who wonders why everyone thinks Luna is unusual, as she talks and acts like several in his family From quigonginger at yahoo.com Mon Dec 27 14:20:15 2004 From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger) Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 14:20:15 -0000 Subject: Luna gets an O in ancient runes In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120632 Valky wrote: (snip) > How can Luna get an O in ancient runes if she never took an OWL? > > Not to be guilty of dismissing anything to hastily I have done a bit > of research and I have a theory; > > Luna gets an Inheritance. > > The runic symbol O is Othila, it means homeland ancestral > inheritance and a change in your future. > > So accordingly Luna inherits her homeland, perhaps her dad is for > the chop in HBP, or her future changes, such as she becomes popular. (snip) Ginger: Oooooh, Valky! There's someone we haven't considered to be the half- blood prince! Mr Lovegood. If he is the half-blood prince, and he does buy the farm, and Luna inherits it, thus becoming a half-blood princess, there could be something there that would tie in with Harry. It would make the introduction of Luna more meaningful than anything I could see in OoP. I can see the Quibbler being an important part of HBP. Perhaps it is he that was described on JKR's website. Luna has dirty-blond hair, so her father's may have been tawny. Not that it has to be, but it does open another interesting line of thought. Ginger, reconsidering her view on Trevor. From vmonte at yahoo.com Mon Dec 27 14:41:06 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 14:41:06 -0000 Subject: Time travel with Mirror of Erised. Was: The mirror onthe website In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120633 Geoff wrote: No way could Harry have /heard/ a voice which he thought was his father's. His head was filled with the Dementor-induced memories and the Patronus had been conjured from the opposite side of the lake. His assumption is based on his glimpse... He says to Hermione later that he had seen the person... "I think it was my dad." vmonte responds: Sorry, I think I was confusing in my post. What I was trying to say was that perhaps both incidents: Harry thinking that he hears his father yelling for his mother to run during the dementor attack, and Harry thinking that he sees his father doing the patronus, are both cases of mistaken identity. That both times Harry is really hearing and seeing himself. vivian From vmonte at yahoo.com Mon Dec 27 14:53:51 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 14:53:51 -0000 Subject: Warning Ron is Dumbledore post! Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120634 Warning! For Ron is Dumbledore enthusiasts. We don't know how the brain attack has impacted Ron yet. I'm pretty sure that Ron is going to have residual side effects from the DoM attack. He could very well have the memories of another wizard inside of him. Since the brain was located at the DoM it would have to be the brain of an important wizard. Could it be Flamel's brain? If the brain belonged to Flamel would Ron now know how to make the SS/PS? There are a few loose ends that need to be tied up regarding Dumbledore and Flamel. I want to know how Dumbledore and Flamel met/are connected. Does Ron go back in time and look up Flamel (based on the memories he has)? If Ron goes back in time at the age of 17 does he end up being Flamel's apprentice? Think of what he could learn from such a wizard. And could the Flamel family be living under a false name for protection--meaning that they are going under the alias of Dumbledore. I would think that periodically changing your name and moving would be imperative for Flamel. I'm sure that other dark wizards would have wanted the PS/SS. Or is Ron's/Dumbledore's relationship to Flamel solely based on the brain attack memories? Meaning that Ron is now a combination of Ron/Flamel. Now that I'm on a roll, how do we really know how old Flamel was? If he kept changing his name every 200 years or so, he could have been quite old. Maybe the Order of the Phoenix is older than we even expect. Perhaps Flamel trained Ron to take over as head of the Order. Perhaps this Order was originally established to fight against Salazar. From klevasseur at earthlink.net Mon Dec 27 13:56:38 2004 From: klevasseur at earthlink.net (ms_luna_knows) Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 13:56:38 -0000 Subject: These are interesting predictions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120636 > moony myst bumped to the front this message from jo - Mooseming: > OK folks here are my predictions: >OWLs > > Neville will come top in Herbology > > Jo again: > Neville however, will get an 'O' in Potion > Related to these predictions: Does anyone else think that Neville >is going to be a Healer? I had this thought after reading OOTP and > these guesses about Neville's grades would square with it. > > Hickengruendler: > >I think it is possible. And it would be especially nice, if he is > able to cure his parents. However, I just don't think he will become > a healer. Ever since reading JKR's statement that one of Harry's > classmates (not Harry, not Ron and not the one we probably think > about [Hermione, probably]) will become a teacher, I think she meant > Neville. Especially since Harry's dream in OotP, where McGonagall is > playing the bagpipes and Neville is dancing with Professor Sprout. Of > course he just could have been associated with Sprout because of his > love for Herbology, however, Harry's dreams often involve a lot of > foreshadowing, and I'm interpreting this dream this way, that > McGonagall will have the command (in other words, she'll be > headmistress), and Neville will become the Herbology teacher. > snip> Ms. Luna, I don't think that this dream of Harry's negates Neville becoming a healer. In fact it could point to him becoming one. My reasoning behind this are that healers and herbalists work *hand-in-hand*, work together to heal those that are *sick*. For example, remember in CoS when muggle borns were being petrified? Prof. Sprout was the one who had the herb or plant that when matured and properly prepared by Madam Pomfrey cured everyone who had been petrified. Healers need herbalists in order to come up with potions to cure those in the WW, so therefore they work together. As far as McGonagall playing the bagpipes while Neville and Prof. Sprout are dancing, this could point to her either being headmistress or MoM, ...(MoM has *command* of both St. Mungo's and Hogwarts) Just another interpretation of the dream. From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Mon Dec 27 16:27:12 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 16:27:12 -0000 Subject: Did Snape Try to Warn James at GH? (Re: Here is an interesting Snape one) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120637 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dungrollin" wrote: > > I don't think the secret keeper telling someone the secret can > completely break the charm, because DD sends Harry the slip of paper > with the location of the HQ of the OotP. If the secret was then out > to everyone, the whole charm would have to be re-done, and all the > people who were in on the secret before Harry (and including Harry) > would have to be told all over again. > IMO a more significant question would be: "Does the charm have to be re-set if the SK changes?" If yes, then Pettigrew must have led Voldy to GH. If no, then Black stays on the suspect list. I'd guess the answer would be no. Suppose DD dropped off the twig. If knowledge of GP were then erased from the minds of everyone that DD has told, nobody would ever be able to find the Headquarters again. It seems logical that once told, always know. Extrapolating that to GH anyone Sirius told would also retain the knowledge, even after he stopped being SK. Particularly necessary in a war situation where an SK could be killed. It'd be a bit careless to lose buildings and supporters by being too clever for your own good with the spellwork. A short digression: Strolled through Christmas (yes, very good, thank you; roast goose and a superb Guigal Cote Rotie), now it's almost New Year, traditionally an opportunity to review the past and set targets for the future. Time to move on, I think. Fresh woods and pastures new - that kind of stuff. After almost a thousand posts to the board enthusiasm has been replaced by a combination of ennui and an increasing disappointment brought on by the decline in quality of recent posts, something some members know I've been concerned about for some time. They ought to, I've bent their ears often enough saying so. Too few posts now with style and grace and wit; posts that one can enjoy and appreciate even while disagreeing. "Oh, my Elkins and my blue!squeak long ago" I'll still be posting of course, but it won't be here. A few of you may have seen me surface on another site a couple of months back while I was exploring possible alternative groups (there's some *very* familiar names among the members) and that's where Kneasy will decline into (hopefully) disreputable dotage. If any feel so inclined, I'll continue to respond to interesting emails. Enjoy the new book, Kneasy From vmonte at yahoo.com Mon Dec 27 16:30:53 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 16:30:53 -0000 Subject: Was Snape lurking in PoA or was he on his way to meet with Peter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120638 Potioncat wrote: I think Snape and possibly most of Hogwarts knew the nicknames of the Marauders. But I'm sure he didn't know about their being animagi. He didn't recognise Black as a dog in PoA. (or was that GoF?) I don't think he knew the map was a map, but only that it was made by the Marauders and could be dangerous for Harry. vmonte responds: Good points. Snape also never recognized Wormtail/Scabbers even though he saw the rat at several potions classes with Ron (if I remember this right). I guess Snape wasn't a DE at the time Peter was. Or, maybe he didn't know that Peter was an animagus. You would think that Peter would have told Voldemort about the marauders though. Potioncat again: And, it's good to see Vmonte posting again! vmonte: Thanks :) From vmonte at yahoo.com Mon Dec 27 16:47:44 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 16:47:44 -0000 Subject: Did Snape Try to Warn James at GH? (Re: Here is an interesting Snape one) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120639 Potioncat wrote: According to PoA, in the Shrieking Shack, Black doesn't know Snape is a teacher at Hogwarts and according to GoF, Black never suspected Snape of working for LV. It appears that Black and Snape had no contact after graduating from Hogwarts. That would also mean that Black didn't know Snape suspected him of betraying the Potters. Nor did he know that Snape warned the Potters (or at least DD) about an attack. But based on the comment Snape made in the Shrieking Shack, about James being too arrogant to believe Black would betray him, Snape had told either James or DD that Black had betrayed the Potters. vmonte responds: Didn't everyone in the WW believe that Sirius was the one that betrayed the Potters because Peter framed him for the job? Snape's comments in the Shrieking Shack could be based on what was common (although incorrect) knowledge in the WW. Did Snape specifically warn Dumbledore about Sirius or about an attack by Voldemort? (I'm not remembering the facts now.) vivian From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Mon Dec 27 17:06:52 2004 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 17:06:52 -0000 Subject: Hermione In Trouble? In-Reply-To: <012d01c4d488$3e671400$f5606b51@talyn> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120640 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "joanne mcnamee" wrote: > > The problem with Hermione is that she has never recieved any consicences for her actions. > > book 1- They win the house cup after breaking bucket load of rules. > > Book 2-Stealing ingredients from a teachers private store room and using them to make a dark magic/restricted potion. > > book 3-Breaks the law to save Sirius and Buckbeak with Dumbledor's blessing. > > Book 4-Caputures a illegal animagus but instead of reporting Rita uses it to her advatage and as a benefit gets revenge on the woman resposible for writting some nasty things about her. > > Book 5- Rita turns up looking very much worse for wear (the woman has had her main source of income stripped from her after all) and is again blackmailed into doing Hermione's bidding. Plus a pretty nasty secretcy spell is cast that does nothing to keep the secret just serves as humilitation for the person who spilled the beans. > > I'm not saying Hermione didn't have good intentions but when things go wrong like with the Centures Hermione is always bailed out and doesn't learn from these mistakes. > So she's grown up from a girl who feared breaking even the smallest rule to blackmailing a reporter to serve her own ends. Morally Hermione is treading deep water. > Hickengruendler: Oh dear, than maybe I'm treading deep waters as well, because the whole book I waited for this scene. I thought: "Why don't they just go to Rita and force her to write the truth", and I was immensly pleased that they finally did it. Yes, Hermione might not have used the finest method in using blackmail, but truth to be told, the real problem lies IMO in a reporter that needs to be blackmailed to write the truth. Also, these people are at war, and in blackmailing Rita Hermione very well might have saved many people's lives, who njow believe in Voldemort's return and were able to prepare themselves for the war. My empathy for Rita Skeeter is very limited. She is a nasty and cruel woman who uses the amount of power she has (and yes, well read reporters are very powerful people) to destroy the lives and careers of other people by writing mean spirited lies about them. IMO, Rita's punishment was just as much poetical justice, as the memory charm that hit Lockhart. It was about time someone stopped her, and seeing that the alternative was a nice jailtime in Azkaban, I think Hermione definitely chose the more merciful way. Besides, I am sure Rita will be on the top again in the next books, after all, she is now the reporter who believed in Harry Potter and made the interview, while everybody else thought, that he's mad. And it's the same about the Time-Turner: Should Hermione have done nothing to save Sirius and Buckbeak, just because it was against the law? Obviously, it is the law that needs to be changed, with a Minister that can make decisions about life and death all by himself and chose to ignore three eye-witnesses who said that Sirius was innocent. Yes, he didn't even wait with the Dementors Kiss until Lupin returned and would be able to give an account as well. Should Hermione have negative consequences for not obeying to a government that is obviously that wrong and close to a dictatorship? In contrast, I think it was a major step for Hermione to develop in the right direction and not become another Percy (who I like as a character very much and who I feel sorry for, by the way). The only point where I agree with you is the Marietta incident. I have mixed feeling about this, just because Marietta seemed to be in a difficult situation, torn between her friends and family and did IMO not deserve to have the Sneak spell still on her face at the end of the book. Hickengruendler From ibotsjfvxfst at yahoo.co.uk Mon Dec 27 17:50:20 2004 From: ibotsjfvxfst at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?Hans=20Andr=E9a?=) Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 17:50:20 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Character Discussion: Voldemort Message-ID: <20041227175020.49398.qmail@web25106.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120641 Imagine the human microcosm: in the centre the divine thought-spark created millions of years ago in another universe where time does not exist. It's a four dimensional universe consisting of length, breadth, height and infinity. There is no such thing as good and evil there. There's only the plan of the One Architect and everyone in that universe works in accordance with that Plan and thereby increases his own glory and eternal joy. But where the Spirit is there is freedom, and eons ago groups of entities decided to develop a plan that deviated from the Divine Plan. They descended into a three dimensional universe and "fell in love with their own image" (see: the legend of Noarcissus). Spirit and matter cannot mix and so they entered a process of crystallisation. The spirit withdrew and the soul was left without its guide. Thus death became the wages of sin and suffering a familiar experience. The microcosm consists of a higher self and a lower self. In the divine microcosm these two form one single divine Son of the Potter of the Universe. Such a perfect microcosm is truly a Temple in which the Spirit lives. The fulfilment of the Plan is that the Divine Human Being be able to manifest himself in the total Divine Septenary. Just like the Creation itself, the microcosm has seven planes of existence in which the human being should become fully conscious. Because of the Fall, both the higher self and the lower self became "kindled in wrath" as Jacob Boehme puts it. The lower and higher self are reflections of each other and if the lower self transgresses the divine laws, the higher self shares the consequences. When the microcosm "fell" in vibration rate and so entered this universe of time and space, the higher self kept losing its counterpart, the lower self, through death. By the process of human reproduction the higher self was given the opportunity of recreating the lower self. After a baby has been conceived somewhere, the higher self of a microcosm infuses its life into the spinal column of the foetus and so the new lower self can continue the journey where the previous one was broken off through death. All the previous experiences, talents, fears, desires and faults are poured back into the foetus. The new baby about to be born is a faithful replica of the higher self, which itself is a faithful replica of the previous person inhabiting the microcosm. And so the cycle of reincarnation turns endlessly, the lower self changing the higher self through life, then dying, and the higher self projecting itself into a new foetus and thus creating a new lower self. Meanwhile Lily is asleep in the heart of the lower self. She is like the sphinx under the desert sand. Like Pier Gynt the lower self wanders through the endless deserts until one day he realises the total futility of it all, and he finds the buried sphinx. He uncovers the sphinx and Lily wakes up. As I said previously, the structure of a microcosm is like that of a cosmos. Just as the earth has a zodiac of twelve constellations surrounding it, so does the lower self. The microcosm has a spherical "shell" around it with twelve concentrations of energy and numerous smaller "stars". These "stars" are electromagnetic fields which contain all the person's interests, ambitions, phobias, desires. Naturally they differ for every person. The microcosm has seven shells, each of which corresponds to one of the seven cosmic planes that comprise the universal House of God. As the human beings we are live in the Seventh Cosmic Plane, the seventh shell of the microcosm is active and the twelve constellations of the microcosmic zodiac burn brightly and control our lives as the puppet master controls his puppets. Before the Fall it was the twelve constellations of eternal beauty and harmony in the sixth shell that governed the microcosm. As the twelve wise fairies bestowed their divine gifts upon the young princess in "Briar Rose", so the twelve stars in the original microcosm shone with unbelievable glory on the lower self, providing it with twelve faculties to carry the Divine Plan to its spectacular fulfilment. This was "when the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy". (Job 38:7) However the Fall resulted in the extinguishing of the twelve Stars of Eternal Life and twelve new lights were lit. Lucifer, the bright morning star, fell from heaven and the whole microcosm was kindled in unholy fire. Man had eaten of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. That is Lucifer: Voldemort - a mixture of good and evil. This is why Quirrell says, expressing Voldemort's philosophy: "There is no good and evil, there is only power, and those too weak to seek it...." And the lower self, as a creation of Lucifer, is likewise a mixture of good and evil. However no matter how good, we still live outside of the Divine Plan. Until the twelve stars shine in the sixth shell of the microcosm, we exist as creatures of Voldemort and will remain subject to death and suffering. Voldemort is not our enemy. He is our personal god, our creator, the provider of our life energy, albeit a temporary life. Until Harry is born. James kisses Lily, the sleeping princess of eternal beauty, and she wakes up. Their union results in the birth of a baby boy whose coming was foretold eons ago: "For to us a child is born, to us a son is given; and the government will be upon his shoulder, and his name will be called 'Wonderful Counsellor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.'" (Isaiah 9:6) A new soul is born in the lower self and this is destined to drive Lucifer from his throne. At the birth of the Boy the ancient, long extinguished morning star begins to glimmer in the sixth microcosmic shell. Sirius, the bright new morning star, is visible again for the first time in innumerable millennia. Voldemort knows that a power greater than he has been born in his realm and he sets out to kill it before it can grow beyond his control. Like Herod he attempts to kill the power not of this world, but, like Herod, he fails. He has become Satan, the "adversary", and will fight Harry to the last breath. This same story appears in the Alchemical Wedding of Christian Rosycross. On the fourth day a play is performed and begins thus: "A very ancient King came on, with some servants; before his throne was brought a little chest, with mention being made that it was found upon the water. Now it being opened, there appeared in it a lovely baby, together with some jewels, and a small letter of parchment sealed and superscribed to the King, which the King therefore opened; and having read it, wept, and then declared to his servants how injuriously the King of the Moors had deprived his aunt of her country, and had extinguished all the royal seed except this infant, with the daughter of which country he had now the intention of matching his son." The King of the Moors here is Voldemort. There was no worry about racial discrimination in those days and with apologies to any black people reading this, black was used as a symbol of the power of darkness. Now that I've introduced Voldemort I think we can introduce Harry next time. Voldemort will come up again of course, as Harry constantly defeats him. Voldemort is also discussed in eastern spiritual traditions, for example in Buddhism he is called Mara, bitterness. It is my hope that people of other spiritual backgrounds will extend my discussions beyond my limited knowledge of these things. ===== 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 ohneill_2001 at yahoo.com Mon Dec 27 18:47:30 2004 From: ohneill_2001 at yahoo.com (ohneill_2001) Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 18:47:30 -0000 Subject: Hermione In Trouble? In-Reply-To: <012d01c4d488$3e671400$f5606b51@talyn> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120642 Joanne wrote: > So she's grown up from a girl who feared breaking even the smallest rule to blackmailing a reporter to serve her own ends. Morally Hermione is treading deep water. > Now Cory: I think one of JKR's central messages in the series is that, when justice requires it, rules can and should be broken. In real life, this leads to all sorts of ethical questions, not the least of which is on whose sense of justice shall we rely in making the determination. Nonetheless though, I think it's fair to conclude that this is a message she is trying to convey throughout the books. The Trio continually breaks rules, yet we do not see them as "bad" characters because their reasons are always honorable (well ok, "usually" honorable). By contrast, in OotP, Draco and friends cooperated with authority (Umbridge) and followed her rules, and for that we are meant to see them as "bad" characters, because the authority figure they were following was one that we are meant to see as unjust and evil. --Cory From gbannister10 at aol.com Mon Dec 27 22:15:03 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 22:15:03 -0000 Subject: Time travel with Mirror of Erised. Was: The mirror onthe website In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120643 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "vmonte" wrote: vmonte: > Sorry, I think I was confusing in my post. What I was trying to say > was that perhaps both incidents: Harry thinking that he hears his > father yelling for his mother to run during the dementor attack, and > Harry thinking that he sees his father doing the patronus, are both > cases of mistaken identity. That both times Harry is really hearing > and seeing himself. Geoff: My apologies also. I think I did indeed misinterpret your post. However, I wonder about the possbility of your theory that Harry mistook the voice of his own time-travelled self for his father. In your message 120634, you wrote "Remember that Harry hears this voice during PoA when he is 13 years old. His voice would certainly be different at 18 years of age." In the section under discussion in POA, we read: 'White fog obscured his senses... big, blurred shapes were moving around him... then came a new voice, a man's voice, shouting, panicking - "Lily, take Harry and go! It's Him! Go! Run! I'll hold him off -" The sounds of someone stumbling from a room - a door bursting open - a cackle of high-pitched laughter -' (POA "The Patronus" p.178 UK edition) This raises a couple of points, some of which may have been covered. First, if I hear a guy of 18 speaking and canont see him (say, on the telephone), I can usually distinguish that this is a younger person and not an older man by the depth and timbre of the voice. Can Harry? Would he be sufficiently with it to be able to make such a judgment under the circumstances and realise that the voice was too young to be that of his father? Second, ISTR that someone has suggested that Harry would call Lily by her name to disguise who he was. Under the sudden strain of events, would he remember to do this during the attack and not call her "Mum" under the pressure of the moment? But further, in PS, we have this snippet: 'Quirrell was walking backwards at him so that Voldemort could still see him. The evil face was now smiling. "How touching..." it hissed. "I always value bravery... Yes, boy, your parents were brave... I killed your father first and he put up a courageous fight... but your mother needn't have died... she was trying to protect you... now give me the Stone unless you want her to have died in vain."' (PS "The Man with Two Faces" p. 213 UK edition) In the POA action, the man is saying that he will hold off Voldemort. In PS, Voldemort states that he killed James. If this was not James but was Time-turned!Harry, if Voldemort had killed him, Future!Harry is already dead.... So where would that leave us? I think I shall remain a member of the "James was there" gang and retain my sanity.... Geoff http://www.aspectsofexmoor.com Pay a virtual visit to the Exmoor National Park From vmonte at yahoo.com Mon Dec 27 23:21:04 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 23:21:04 -0000 Subject: Time travel with Mirror of Erised. Was: The mirror onthe website In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120644 Geoff wrote: In the POA action, the man is saying that he will hold off Voldemort. In PS, Voldemort states that he killed James. If this was not James but was Time-turned!Harry, if Voldemort had killed him, Future!Harry is already dead.... So where would that leave us? I think I shall remain a member of the "James was there" gang and retain my sanity.... vmonte responds: Geoff you made some excellent points. Here's another thought: If Harry did go back in time (and was killed by Voldemort,) maybe Snape was there and brought him back to life. What's Snape's first words to Harry's Potions class? Something about putting a stopper on death? Maybe this is why Dumbledore trusts him. vivian From caseylane at wideopenwest.com Tue Dec 28 00:29:52 2004 From: caseylane at wideopenwest.com (Casey) Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 00:29:52 -0000 Subject: Time travel with Mirror of Erised. Was: The mirror onthe website In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120645 > > vmonte responds: > Geoff you made some excellent points. Here's another thought: > If Harry did go back in time (and was killed by Voldemort,) maybe > Snape was there and brought him back to life. What's Snape's first > words to Harry's Potions class? Something about putting a stopper on > death? Maybe this is why Dumbledore trusts him. If this all took place, then where is James? Casey From sroginson at sbcglobal.net Mon Dec 27 21:35:38 2004 From: sroginson at sbcglobal.net (stephen roginson) Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 13:35:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: The Veil in the Chamber of Secrets? (was Re: more predictions from Jo) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041227213538.84165.qmail@web81501.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120646 > > Kneasy wrote: > > I've occasionally posted theories on the possibilty of > > possession being a key plot device for some time and it > > prompts some intriguing questions: > > > > 1. It's the Chamber of Secrets - plural. What else was > > down there? > > Jo / "mooseming" wrote: > I don't know but I bet the veiled gateway started life there! My only question regarding the 'Veil' in the Chamber of Secrets... How would it get from the Chamber into the Ministry/Dept. of Mysteries? It would not relocate itself. It would require powerful magic. Someone, or someones, would have to direct that action. If that is the case, how is it that noone on the Hogwarts staff knew for sure whether there was a Chamber of Secrets, or how to get into it? Just curious... "sroginson" From pjarrett at gmail.com Mon Dec 27 22:39:18 2004 From: pjarrett at gmail.com (Patrick Jarrett) Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 17:39:18 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Warning Ron is Dumbledore post! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3def328f04122714397853132a@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120647 On Mon, 27 Dec 2004 14:53:51 -0000, vmonte wrote: VMonte: > Now that I'm on a roll, how do we really know how old Flamel was? If > he kept changing his name every 200 years or so, he could have been > quite old. Maybe the Order of the Phoenix is older than we even > expect. Perhaps Flamel trained Ron to take over as head of the Order. > Perhaps this Order was originally established to fight against > Salazar. Patrick: In the first book he is said to be 665, and I cannot think of a good reason that he would hide his age from the WW... so I personally believe the account of his age. As for your theories on The Order: it is indeed possible but the HPL notes that the OOtP was created by DD. (cite: http://www.hp-lexicon.org/wizards/order-phoenix.html) -- Patrick From willsonkmom at msn.com Tue Dec 28 00:48:41 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 00:48:41 -0000 Subject: Snape and Wormtail (wasRe: Was Snape lurking in PoA or was he on In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120648 > > vmonte responds: Good points. Snape also never recognized > Wormtail/Scabbers even though he saw the rat at several potions > classes with Ron (if I remember this right). > > I guess Snape wasn't a DE at the time Peter was. Or, maybe he didn't > know that Peter was an animagus. You would think that Peter would > have told Voldemort about the marauders though. Potioncat: I don't think Snape knew that Pettigrew was a DE. I also don't think very many of the DEs knew about the animagi. Who knows what LV knew? But come to think of it, I wonder if Pettigrew knew that Snape had been a DE? How did he feel all those years about being so close to Snape? Although, Wormtail was the traitor and he certainly knew he was near DD! From willsonkmom at msn.com Tue Dec 28 00:58:16 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 00:58:16 -0000 Subject: Did Snape Try to Warn James at GH? (Re: Here is an interesting Snape one) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120649 > vmonte responds: > > Didn't everyone in the WW believe that Sirius was the one that > betrayed the Potters because Peter framed him for the job? Snape's > comments in the Shrieking Shack could be based on what was common > (although incorrect) knowledge in the WW. Did Snape specifically warn > Dumbledore about Sirius or about an attack by Voldemort? (I'm not > remembering the facts now.) > Potioncat: We know Snape spied on LV for DD. We don't "know" what information he gave DD.I copied this from a post upthread, sorry, forgot to notice the number but Jen Reese quoted from an old post of Mooseming > > Mooseming: > > > Why? Because Snape was there when Harry's parents were killed (ok > > > ok making it up now but bear with me). > > > > "Like father, like son, Potter! I have just saved your neck you > > > should be thanking me on bended knee! You would have been well > > > served if he'd killed you! YOU'D HAVE DIED LIKE YOUR FATHER, too > > > arrogant to believeyou might be mistaken in Black" > > > (POA, my capitals) it's Potioncat now adding this, Snape believes Potter was warned about Black but didn't take the advice. So Snape believes like everyone else, that Black killed all those people and in addition, Snape believes that Potter had been warned about Black. Was he the one who warned Potter? Did Snape warn DD? Oddly enough, Potter may have taken the advice. But of course, Snape doesn't know that, at least not before the end of PoA. I don't think Snape was at GH when LV was there, unless LV did not know Snape was there. Potioncat From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 28 01:01:04 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 01:01:04 -0000 Subject: Time travel with Mirror of Erised. Was: The mirror onthe website In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120650 Geoff: snip In the POA action, the man is saying that he will hold off Voldemort. In PS, Voldemort states that he killed James. If this was not James but was Time-turned!Harry, if Voldemort had killed him, Future!Harry is already dead.... So where would that leave us? I think I shall remain a member of the "James was there" gang and retain my sanity.... Alla: Good point, Geoff, but let me ask you a little bit more general question. Do you believe that Harry is going to be time traveling to ... somewhere? Do you think that JKR answered "Not telling" to the question "Whether Harry will be time travelling again" for a reason or she was just having fun? I also tend to think that James was there, but something tells me that Harry did go to the past, maybe not even necessarily to GH, although if I were to choose, I would pick this place as the most logical one. What am I getting at? I am almost positive that Harry time travelled somewhere, I just don't know where and Mirror of Erised seems like a fun device to do it. From vmonte at yahoo.com Tue Dec 28 01:15:22 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 01:15:22 -0000 Subject: Time travel with Mirror of Erised. Was: The mirror onthe website In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120651 Casey wrote (regarding Harry being at GH): If this all took place, then where is James? vmonte responds: Hi Casey. I have no canon to support any of my wild theories (sometimes I get on a roll--sorry). My idea is that perhaps James was already dead, and was killed a few minutes/hours before the attack at GH. This suspicion came from my first reading of the PoA book (the scene where Harry tells Lupin about hearing his father). JKR even makes a point of writing in that scene that Harry had never heard his father's voice before. And Lupin reacts to Harry's comment by saying something like: 'You heard James?' I found Lupin's reaction a bit suspicious--but that's just me. I read a while ago that JKR was responsible for writing the flashback scene in the SS movie. In that scene she makes sure to only show Lily, not James. I also noticed that the male voice Harry hears yelling at Lily to run during the dementor attack in the PoA book was not in the PoA movie. In the movie Harry only hears his mother scream. I wonder if this change was made because the voice Harry is assuming to be of his father is really someone else. Would the movie audience have recognized the voice as being another HP character? Just a thought From karentheunicorn at msn.com Tue Dec 28 01:45:13 2004 From: karentheunicorn at msn.com (KAREN OGBURN) Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 20:45:13 -0500 Subject: Snape and Wormtail (wasRe: Was Snape lurking in PoA or was he on References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120652 Potioncat wrote: > I don't think Snape knew that Pettigrew was a DE. I also don't think very many of the DEs knew about the animagi. Who knows what LV knew? But come to think of it, I wonder if Pettigrew knew that Snape had been a DE? How did he feel all those years about being so close to Snape? Although, Wormtail was the traitor and he certainly knew he was near DD! Curious thought by me on Death Eaters, I seem to remember something from the GoF, near the end where all the Death Eaters met with LV in the graveyard I beleve it was, when Harry was caught....don't quote me on this as I'm doing this from memory. But didn't all the Death Eaters have masks on?? And though LV recognized some of them by name etc like Malfoy, some he never said there name he just walked on by them. So when I read the statement that you wrote Potioncat it got me thinking. Maybe some of the Death Eaters don't even know each other. I'm just thinking this out right now as I type so I'm just considering this now as I've never even though on it that much, plus this may be an already common idea that I just never too notice of before. Maybe some Death Eaters are not known to each other because perhaps LV wants them to be well...spy's (for a lack of a better word) They can keep an eye on the other DE's. You'd be less likely to betray LV if your not sure who's loyal and whos not. Just a though since I don't post that much. KarentheUnicorn From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Tue Dec 28 04:49:25 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 04:49:25 -0000 Subject: Did Snape Try to Warn James at GH? (Re: Here is an interesting Snape one) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120653 Dungrollin: > > I don't think the secret keeper telling someone the secret can > > completely break the charm, because DD sends Harry the slip of paper with the location of the HQ of the OotP. If the secret was then out to everyone, the whole charm would have to be re-done, and all the people who were in on the secret before Harry (and including Harry) would have to be told all over again. > > >Kneasy: > IMO a more significant question would be: > "Does the charm have to be re-set if the SK changes?" > > If yes, then Pettigrew must have led Voldy to GH. > If no, then Black stays on the suspect list. > > I'd guess the answer would be no. > Suppose DD dropped off the twig. If knowledge of GP were then > erased from the minds of everyone that DD has told, nobody would > ever be able to find the Headquarters again. It seems logical that > once told, always know. > > Extrapolating that to GH anyone Sirius told would also retain the > knowledge, even after he stopped being SK. > Particularly necessary in a war situation where an SK could be > killed. It'd be a bit careless to lose buildings and supporters by > being too clever for your own good with the spellwork. > Valky: So why did Peter confess to telling the secret to Voldemort? and why did he ever need to? Kneasy: > Time to move on, I think. Fresh woods and pastures new - that > kind of stuff. > Well regardless what you might think of me, since we are 13,000 simple humans it is too high a charge to expect you to *all* like me...... *fluttering eyelashes* ;D ......... it has been a pleasure to be in your company Kneasy and I bid you a fond farewell. Valky From greatelderone at yahoo.com Tue Dec 28 05:04:47 2004 From: greatelderone at yahoo.com (greatelderone) Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 05:04:47 -0000 Subject: Hermione In Trouble? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120654 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ohneill_2001" wrote: > I think one of JKR's central messages in the series is that, when > justice requires it, rules can and should be broken. In real life, > this leads to all sorts of ethical questions, not the least of which > is on whose sense of justice shall we rely in making the > determination. > > Nonetheless though, I think it's fair to conclude that this is a > message she is trying to convey throughout the books. The Trio > continually breaks rules, yet we do not see them as "bad" characters > because their reasons are always honorable (well ok, "usually" > honorable). By contrast, in OotP, Draco and friends cooperated with > authority (Umbridge) and followed her rules, and for that we are > meant to see them as "bad" characters, because the authority figure > they were following was one that we are meant to see as unjust and > evil. GEO: How does that make Hermione and co. different from Umbridge and co.? From the perspective of the book, both have done things in order to further their respective cause. Umbridge may be wrong, but how exactly does that make Hermione right? Trying to get her killed by the centaurs, blackmailing reporters and cursing her fellow students isn't any better than Umbridge using her authority except maybe for the fact that Hermione is the underdog while Umbridge has the establishment behind her, Furthermore are we going to see Hermione get her comeuppance just as Umbridge get hers and probably Draco, Voldemort and Lucius will get theirs. Rowling can't spare Hermione and punish the others for their various offenses especially when Draco was practicaly brainwashed by his father's ideology. From greatelderone at yahoo.com Tue Dec 28 05:16:57 2004 From: greatelderone at yahoo.com (greatelderone) Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 05:16:57 -0000 Subject: Hermione In Trouble? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120655 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "hickengruendler" wrote: > Yes, Hermione might not have used > the finest method in using blackmail, but truth to be told, the real > problem lies IMO in a reporter that needs to be blackmailed to write > the truth. Also, these people are at war, and in blackmailing Rita > Hermione very well might have saved many people's lives, who njow > believe in Voldemort's return and were able to prepare themselves for > the war. GEO: When has a wartime situation ever become a decent excuse to bend/violate existing rules. So far what Hermione has done is just one of the excesses of trying to win/save lives though not on the scale of many of the crimes we've seen in past wars. My empathy for Rita Skeeter is very limited. She is a nasty > and cruel woman who uses the amount of power she has (and yes, well > read reporters are very powerful people) to destroy the lives and > careers of other people by writing mean spirited lies about them. > IMO, Rita's punishment was just as much poetical justice, as the > memory charm that hit Lockhart. GEO: And who gave Hermione the authority to judge and give out justice for someone like Skeeter. Yes she is a scumbag reporter and she has committed libel, but what Hermione has done was out of line. Lockhart brought it upon himself, Skeeter was blackmailed to do it. She deserves punishment, but not one made by a teenager with an overdeveloped sense of justice. From ohneill_2001 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 28 06:12:23 2004 From: ohneill_2001 at yahoo.com (ohneill_2001) Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 06:12:23 -0000 Subject: Hermione In Trouble? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120656 greatelderone wrote: > GEO: How does that make Hermione and co. different from Umbridge and > co.? From the perspective of the book, both have done things in > order to further their respective cause. Umbridge may be wrong, but > how exactly does that make Hermione right? Trying to get her killed > by the centaurs, blackmailing reporters and cursing her fellow > students isn't any better than Umbridge using her authority except > maybe for the fact that Hermione is the underdog while Umbridge has > the establishment behind her, > > Furthermore are we going to see Hermione get her comeuppance just as > Umbridge get hers and probably Draco, Voldemort and Lucius will get > theirs. Rowling can't spare Hermione and punish the others for their > various offenses especially when Draco was practicaly brainwashed by > his father's ideology. Now Cory: I understand your point. Please understand, I am not trying to defend Hermione's actions; I'm simply giving my interpretation of the text and offering an opinion as to the message that JKR is sending. I agree that some of Hermione's actions in OotP were what one might call ethically questionable, and at some point I would like to see her learn a lesson in that regard. To answer your question about how Hermione and Umbridge are different, I would respond that I think the difference JKR wants us to see is that Hermione's actions were taken in furtherance of a cause that we (the reader) are supposed to believe is "good," while Umbridge's actions (and Rita Skeeter's) were taken in furtherance of a cause that we are supposed to think of as "evil." In real life, this is a difficult distinction to grasp -- nobody thinks they are "evil"; the Delores Umbridges of our world do what they do because they believe they are right, and they believe the ends justify the means. In Potterverse, however, I still think that's the message JKR is sending: If you truly *are* on the side of good (and we know the heroes are, because they're, well, the heroes), then the ends truly *do* justify the means. Again, I'm not agreeing on an ethical level, just giving my interpretation... --Cory From asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 28 07:29:00 2004 From: asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 07:29:00 -0000 Subject: Draco's Presence when Mrs. Norris Found In-Reply-To: <20041227061441.48653.qmail@web81303.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120657 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, GRETCHEN BAKIES wrote: > > I just noticed something strange while I was re-reading COS. Mrs. Norris was found on the second floor (p 105), but the Slytherin common room is down in the dungeon. So why was Draco in the crowd that surrounded Harry, Ron and Hermione? ... > > Also, on p 92, Harry is described as dragging his feet down the second floor corridor to Lockhart's office, but on p. 107, Lockhart describes his office as "nearest - just *upstairs*". Is this a flint? BTW, I'm using the Bloomsbury paperback edition for page references. > > Gretchen bboyminn: There are several inconsistancies in this area of the book, some can be resolved by imagination, other simply can't be resolved at all. For example, Moaning Myrtle's Bathroom has consistently be on the FIRST floor. However, in this section of the book you are referring to, Harry comes up from the Dungeon putting him on the ground floor, then climbs the marble stair case putting him on the first floor (MM!bathroom and infirmary), then he runs up one more stair case to the second floor; that's one too many stairways. What I have discovered on my own, or in conversation with others, is that there is no way to resolve this; it's simply a mistake. Side note: keep in mind that in Brit-speak, second floor is the third story; ground floor (1st), first floor (2nd), and second floor (3rd). Next, consider this, why are ANY of the students on that floor at that time? The feast has presumably ended and they are all heading back to their dorms, but only Gryffindor and Ravenclaw have dorms in towers, Slytherin and Hufflepuff appear to have underground living quarters. This particular area of this particular floor does not seem to be the regular route to Gryffindor tower, so at best, a stray Ravenclaw or two might have past by that area. This too is a mistake, but it can be internally resolved by imagination. One could assume that some student, teacher, or ghost saw Mrs. Norris hanging there and ran to warn Dumbledore, who was in the Great Hall for the feast. When this /person/ ran to Dumbledore to tell him, students and teachers alike came running to find out what was up. Teachers are at the head table which is farthest from the exit door, and would therefore arrive behind the students. This is not found anywhere in the book, nor has it been establish outside the book. It is simply an explanation I made up, but it does explain everyone's arrival at that obscure location at that particular time. It is an explanation that is internally consistent. There are many aspects and occurances in the wizard world that we are not priviledge to simply because Harry is not aware of them. Harry may have simply assumed the feast had ended when he heard students coming, when in reality, some other event or person lead the teachers and student to leave the Great Hall. I guess I haven't really offerred much, other than to confirm that indeed there are inconsistancies here that haven't been resolved. Some corrections have been made in some newer edition, but I don't know if this particular inconsistancy has been fixed. Just a thought. steve/bboyminn (was bboy_mn) From gbannister10 at aol.com Tue Dec 28 07:57:16 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 07:57:16 -0000 Subject: Time travel with Mirror of Erised. Was: The mirror onthe website In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120658 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: Alla: > Good point, Geoff, but let me ask you a little bit more general > question. > > Do you believe that Harry is going to be time traveling to ... > somewhere? Do you think that JKR answered "Not telling" to the > question "Whether Harry will be time travelling again" for a reason > or she was just having fun? What am I getting at? I am almost positive that Harry time travelled > somewhere, I just don't know where and Mirror of Erised seems like a > fun device to do it. Geoff: I haven't looked at this one because I haven't given any deep thought to time travelling by Harry. Several posters have, in the past, said that they hoped JKR would not make a habit of using this as a plot device. To be quite frank, I would see it as a deus-ex-machina being used to get us out of awkward corners in the story. Perhaps I am a simple soul because I really don't see some of the more complicated plot theories - from the possible to the wacky - coming to pass. JKR has produced unusual twists in the story before but not on every page and although she likes to tease us with cryptic comments, I would feel unhappy with a story which finished up deluged with time-travelled and/or Polyjuiced characters coming out of the woodwork on every page in Book 7. On a slightly different point, in message 120651, vmonte added: "In the movie Harry only hears his mother scream. I wonder if this change was made because the voice Harry is assuming to be of his father is really someone else. Would the movie audience have recognized the voice as being another HP character?" This would not necessarily be a problem /if/ the person was Time- travelled!Harry because he would be a 17 or 18 year old and they would use a different actor to represent an older Harry. From esmereldah at yahoo.com Tue Dec 28 06:25:17 2004 From: esmereldah at yahoo.com (Lucy Wooten) Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 22:25:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: (un)masking the DEs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041228062518.33014.qmail@web52210.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120659 Hello, I'm new here. I want to comment on the idea of the Death Eaters not all knowing each other. In modern terrorist groups like Al Quaada (sp?) the members don't all know each other or what other cells of the group are doing. That way if any are caught and interrogated they can tell only about themselves and the people in their immediate group. Since the Death Eaters are essentially a terrorist organization themselves, it would be logical for Voldemort to have arranged the group the same way. However, it makes one wonder just why he revealed the people he did. In the case of Bellatrix everyone knew she was a DE; there was no need to hide it. But why did he address Malfoy? Was it because he wanted to make him vulnerable when he was too powerful for LV to attack openly? From katiebug1233 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 28 07:18:36 2004 From: katiebug1233 at yahoo.com (Kate) Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 07:18:36 -0000 Subject: Hermione In Trouble? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120660 > GEO: How does that make Hermione and co. different from Umbridge and > co.? From the perspective of the book, both have done things in > order to further their respective cause. Umbridge may be wrong, but > how exactly does that make Hermione right? Trying to get her killed > by the centaurs, blackmailing reporters and cursing her fellow > students isn't any better than Umbridge using her authority except > maybe for the fact that Hermione is the underdog while Umbridge has > the establishment behind her, > > Furthermore are we going to see Hermione get her comeuppance just as > Umbridge get hers and probably Draco, Voldemort and Lucius will get > theirs. Rowling can't spare Hermione and punish the others for their > various offenses especially when Draco was practicaly brainwashed by > his father's ideology. I think that there is a definite difference in Hermione & Company and Umbridge & Company. It lies in their INTENTIONS. Hermione is trying to protect people, help her friend and save Sirius while Umbridge is a lot like Voldy in the fact that she is power hungry and will go to any lengths to get it. I don't think that it was Hermione's intention for the centaurs to kill Umbridge, just provide enough of a distraction for them to escape. Umbridge represents ignorance, blind obedience, and evil. I think that JKR is showing us that "I was just following orders" is no excuse for bad behavior. I also think that Umbridge serves as a way to show us that while sometimes unfair and mean spirited, Snape is not EVIL. In addition, I think you are right about Draco. He has been brainwashed by his father's prejudices and I really think that he has a good possibility of redemption. He is just a child after all. -katie From gbannister10 at aol.com Tue Dec 28 11:13:45 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 11:13:45 -0000 Subject: Revealing the plot ( was Re: Time travel with Mirror of Erised. ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120661 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: Alla: > > Good point, Geoff, but let me ask you a little bit more general > question. > > Do you believe that Harry is going to be time traveling to ... > somewhere? Do you think that JKR answered "Not telling" to the > question "Whether Harry will be time travelling again" for a reason > or she was just having fun? Geoff: Having sent off message 120658, I then considered your sentence above while walking the dogs on a brilliantly sunny but chilly Exmoor (just to make you envious?) :-) I think that one of the reasons JKR is often quite cagey and cryptic when answering questions is not so much having fun but the fact that if she gives a direct "yes" or "no", it reveals the plot to an extent. It's probably more enjoyable for the reader if the plot developments come as something of a surprise; you are not thinking along the lines of "Well, that's not going to happen because she said it wouldn't." As an example, one of the most satisfying surprises for me on a first reading of a book was to discover in POA that Sirius Black was a "goodie" after the careful construction of events to make us think he was the opposite. It's that sort of thing which I appreciate - the unexpected.... From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Tue Dec 28 12:59:34 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 07:59:34 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Digest Number 5583 References: <1104234102.7689.11216.m12@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <002a01c4ecdd$15098710$5bc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 120662 Lucy Wooten said: "However, it makes one wonder just why he revealed the people he did. In the case of Bellatrix everyone knew she was a DE; there was no need to hide it. But why did he address Malfoy? Was it because he wanted to make him vulnerable when he was too powerful for LV to attack openly?" DuffyPoo now: I think Malfoy is like Bella and was well-known within the group. LV also mentioned, by name, Avery, Macnair, Crabbe, Goyle, Nott and all those present in the graveyard saw Pettigrew. From OotP we know that Malfoy is known to all three of the Lestranges, Crabbe and Goyle we already knew were 'friends', Jugson, Dolohov, Macnair, Avery, Mulciber and Rookwood. I think Malfoy is one of LV's right-hand men....but I also think Malfoy has plans of his own. :) JMO. From willsonkmom at msn.com Tue Dec 28 13:46:14 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 13:46:14 -0000 Subject: Draco's Presence when Mrs. Norris Found In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120663 Steve/bboyminn wrote: > Next, consider this, why are ANY of the students on that floor at that > time? The feast has presumably ended and they are all heading back to > their dorms, but only Gryffindor and Ravenclaw have dorms in towers, > Slytherin and Hufflepuff appear to have underground living quarters. > This particular area of this particular floor does not seem to be the > regular route to Gryffindor tower, so at best, a stray Ravenclaw or > two might have past by that area. Potioncat: I recall a quote from JKR that said she didn't really have all the Hogwart's locations in her head and if she placed them differently from book to book, she'd chalk it up to magic. (Sorry, I know it's sloppy work not to provide the source.) And in SS/PS it is said that passageways change directions on different days and that staircases like to move around. From willsonkmom at msn.com Tue Dec 28 13:52:59 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 13:52:59 -0000 Subject: Digest Number 5583 In-Reply-To: <002a01c4ecdd$15098710$5bc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120664 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Cathy Drolet" wrote: > Lucy Wooten said: > > "However, it makes one wonder just why he revealed the people he did. In > the case of Bellatrix everyone knew she was a DE; there was no need to hide > it. But why did he address Malfoy? Was it because he wanted to make him > vulnerable when he was too powerful for LV to attack openly?" > > DuffyPoo now: > > I think Malfoy is like Bella and was well-known within the group. LV also > mentioned, by name, Avery, Macnair, Crabbe, Goyle, Nott and all those > present in the graveyard saw Pettigrew. From OotP we know that Malfoy is > known to all three of the Lestranges, Crabbe and Goyle we already knew were > 'friends', Jugson, Dolohov, Macnair, Avery, Mulciber and Rookwood. I think > Malfoy is one of LV's right-hand men....but I also think Malfoy has plans of > his own. :) JMO. Potioncat: I know I should snip, but We're told by Karkaroff that not all the DEs know each other (and we seem to think he's telling the truth) (From the Pensieve in GoF) In one of the books, Ron says that Malfoy had been charged as being a DE but got out of it...so it's not exactly unknown about him. I'm wondering how many of the names were surprises to other DEs and to the population at large. (For example, did Snape know about Nott?) From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Tue Dec 28 14:11:26 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 06:11:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] (un)masking the DEs In-Reply-To: <20041228062518.33014.qmail@web52210.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041228141126.11900.qmail@web53101.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120665 --- Lucy Wooten wrote: > Hello, I'm new here. > > I want to comment on the idea of the Death Eaters not all knowing > each other.... > Since the Death Eaters are essentially a terrorist organization > themselves, it would be logical for Voldemort to have arranged the > group the same way. However, it makes one wonder just why he > revealed the people he did. In the case of Bellatrix everyone knew > she was a DE; there was no need to hide it. But why did he address > Malfoy? Was it because he wanted to make him vulnerable when he > was too powerful for LV to attack openly? Hello Lucy. Good points. I agree that Voldemort would have to take care that losing one DE to the authorities didn't unravel the entire group. "Need to know" is a good policy. Also, from his megamaniacal POV, it means no one knows more than he does, which is not a bad thing when you're trying to keep control. Voldemort's relationship with Lucius is different from the others'. For one thing, he needs Lucius and his wealth a lot more than he needs some of the others, which gives Lucius some small advantage in dealing with the Boss. However it's also an additional danger because Voldemort doesn't like having to need someone else. I'm not sure that there was any reason why Voldemort named names in the graveyard in GOF. I'm more curious to know why he passed by others without naming them. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Jazz up your holiday email with celebrity designs. Learn more. http://celebrity.mail.yahoo.com From elsyee_h at yahoo.com Tue Dec 28 14:24:57 2004 From: elsyee_h at yahoo.com (Tammy) Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 14:24:57 -0000 Subject: (un)masking the DEs In-Reply-To: <20041228062518.33014.qmail@web52210.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120666 Lucy wrote: > > Hello, I'm new here. > > I want to comment on the idea of the Death Eaters not all knowing each other. In modern terrorist groups like Al Quaada (sp?) the members don't all know each other or what other cells of the group are doing. That way if any are caught and interrogated they can tell only about themselves and the people in their immediate group. Since the Death Eaters are essentially a terrorist organization themselves, it would be logical for Voldemort to have arranged the group the same way. However, it makes one wonder just why he revealed the people he did. In the case of Bellatrix everyone knew she was a DE; there was no need to hide it. But why did he address Malfoy? Was it because he wanted to make him vulnerable when he was too powerful for LV to attack openly? Tammy: This is how I imagine it sort of works: Voldemort probably has an "inner circle" of DEs, ones that are all known to each other - for example the ones that went to the DOM. Then there are probably the lower level DEs, known to the higher level, but not to each other. Then he probably has his spies, known to no-one, or perhaps to a few of the inner circle (such as Wormtail in VW1). -Tammy From greatelderone at yahoo.com Tue Dec 28 15:32:06 2004 From: greatelderone at yahoo.com (greatelderone) Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 15:32:06 -0000 Subject: Hermione In Trouble? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120667 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kate" wrote: > I think that there is a definite difference in Hermione & Company > and Umbridge & Company. It lies in their INTENTIONS. Hermione is > trying to protect people, help her friend and save Sirius while > Umbridge is a lot like Voldy in the fact that she is power hungry > and will go to any lengths to get it. I don't think that it was > Hermione's intention for the centaurs to kill Umbridge, just provide > enough of a distraction for them to escape. GEO: How could Hermione not know that the centaurs were going to kill Umbridge or at least do something awful to her. Remember she was in the forest when they issued their threat in respect towards Hagrid when they insinuated that they were going to kill him if it were not for Harry and Hermione since they didn't slaugther foals. From greatelderone at yahoo.com Tue Dec 28 15:31:48 2004 From: greatelderone at yahoo.com (greatelderone) Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 15:31:48 -0000 Subject: Hermione In Trouble? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120668 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ohneill_2001" wrote: > Now Cory: > To answer your question about how Hermione and Umbridge are > different, I would respond that I think the difference JKR wants us > to see is that Hermione's actions were taken in furtherance of a > cause that we (the reader) are supposed to believe is "good," while > Umbridge's actions (and Rita Skeeter's) were taken in furtherance of > a cause that we are supposed to think of as "evil." In real life, > this is a difficult distinction to grasp -- nobody thinks they > are "evil"; the Delores Umbridges of our world do what they do > because they believe they are right, and they believe the ends > justify the means. In Potterverse, however, I still think that's the > message JKR is sending: If you truly *are* on the side of good (and > we know the heroes are, because they're, well, the heroes), then the > ends truly *do* justify the means. GEO: Except that contradicts the whole issue that she raised with Barty Crouch who changed/bent/violated the rules all in order to defeat Voldemort through the use of unforgivable curses and later deprived Sirius of a trial and sent him to Azkaban for over a decade. Obviously what he did, the ends didn't justify the means from Sirius's perspective and no doubt from JKR's perspective since he does get his comeuppance somewhat when his son turns out to be in league with Voldemort, his wife dies and he's shuffled off to some minor ministry. Yet there isn't much of a difference between Hermione and Crouch except Hermione hasn't gone to those extremes, but the fact is both have done things less than ethical for the greater good and Crouch got his just deserts so now the question is will Hermione be punished too for her lapses or is JKR show some favoritism there in regard to Hermione. From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Tue Dec 28 15:35:50 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 15:35:50 -0000 Subject: Hermione In Trouble? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120669 GEO wrote: > > How does that make Hermione and co. different from Umbridge > > and co.? From the perspective of the book, both have done things > > in order to further their respective cause. Umbridge may be > > wrong, but how exactly does that make Hermione right? Trying to > > get her killed by the centaurs, blackmailing reporters and > > cursing her fellow students isn't any better than Umbridge using > > her authority except maybe for the fact that Hermione is the > > underdog while Umbridge has the establishment behind her, > > > > Furthermore are we going to see Hermione get her comeuppance just > > as Umbridge get hers and probably Draco, Voldemort and Lucius > > will get theirs. Rowling can't spare Hermione and punish the > > others for their various offenses especially when Draco was > > practicaly brainwashed by his father's ideology. Cory: > I understand your point. Please understand, I am not trying to > defend Hermione's actions.... > > To answer your question about how Hermione and Umbridge are > different, I would respond that I think the difference JKR wants us > to see is that Hermione's actions were taken in furtherance of a > cause that we (the reader) are supposed to believe is "good," while > Umbridge's actions (and Rita Skeeter's) were taken in furtherance of > a cause that we are supposed to think of as "evil." In real life, > this is a difficult distinction to grasp -- nobody thinks they > are "evil"; the Delores Umbridges of our world do what they do > because they believe they are right, and they believe the ends > justify the means. In Potterverse, however, I still think that's the > message JKR is sending: If you truly *are* on the side of good (and > we know the heroes are, because they're, well, the heroes), then the > ends truly *do* justify the means. > > Again, I'm not agreeing on an ethical level, just giving my > interpretation... Katie: > I think that there is a definite difference in Hermione & Company > and Umbridge & Company. It lies in their INTENTIONS. Hermione is > trying to protect people, help her friend and save Sirius while > Umbridge is a lot like Voldy in the fact that she is power hungry > and will go to any lengths to get it. I don't think that it was > Hermione's intention for the centaurs to kill Umbridge, just provide > enough of a distraction for them to escape. Umbridge represents > ignorance, blind obedience, and evil. I think that JKR is showing > us that "I was just following orders" is no excuse for bad > behavior. I also think that Umbridge serves as a way to show us > that while sometimes unfair and mean spirited, Snape is not EVIL. SSSusan: I'm with Katie on this one, and Cory, I think you should be less apologetic for holding the view you do! GEO stated: "Rowling can't spare Hermione and punish the others for their various offenses," to which I say, "Well, sure she can!" One, for the trite reason that they're her stories; and two, because I think Katie's right that INTENTIONS make all the difference to JKR. One of the things JKR is teaching us, I believe, is that the world isn't all black and white -? there are MANY shades of gray out there. Decisions and actions taken in one situation definitely aren't always identical in appropriateness or rightness in another. Just like in real life, we encounter situational ethics, the proverbial "A man's wife was in desperate need of medication but they had no money or means to pay. So he stole. Is this wrong?" It's NOT so easy as "yes" or "no" for most people. Many will say it's NOT wrong, even if it does deprive the pharmacist of income & stock. Stealing to support a drug habit most people see as wrong. Then again, some will explain it away as that the person can't help it because he's addicted to the drug. Stealing for the thrill of it most people will see as wrong. A few might argue that the poor kid probably had no guidance or attention at home and this is a desperate cry for help. My point? There's gray out there... some closer to white, some closer to black, but enough that we'd never get total agreement amongst the members of this list on these examples. So what does that have to do with JKR? Well, she offers up the gray stuff, too. Hermione's behaviors have been clearly in the gray, right? She stole from Snape's supply cupboard. She kidnapped Rita Skeeter and blackmailed her. She set up a curse to catch any student who narced on the DA without telling them. In many situations, all these are "bad" behaviors. But looking at the particular situations, at the INTENTIONS of Hermione and/or H/R/H, they're more understandable and even, to many people, fully acceptable. What about Umbridge? Well, she punishes a student who speaks out in class & argues with her by having him write, for *hours*, with a quill which slits open the back of his hand. She is prejudiced against all half-breeds. She is power-hungry, if not for her own sake, then at least for Fudge's sake. Her INTENTIONS are clearly selfish, her actions are on occasion EVIL, and she works for the cause of gaining power at any cost. Her actions, then, are seen by most as just plain wrong. Does JKR want us to see this distinction between Hermione [& Harry & Ron] & Umbridge? I think so. Does she want us to think Hermione is perfect? No, I don't think so. But the place where I think JKR wants us to find fault with Hermione isn't in *these* instances; it's in her misunderstanding of how to work with the House Elves and with S.P.E.W. Her heart's in the right place, but her actions are misguided, most seem to feel. She is condescending and wants to force the house elves into changing their lives in the way *she* feels is right, without speaking to them about their own desires and wishes. I think *this* is where Hermione will learn her lesson, get her comeuppance, or whatever. But I don't think JKR will ever "punish" Hermione for the stolen ingredients or leading Umbridge into the forest [I don't think her intention was to have DJU killed but just to get herself & Harry free] or even for the Marietta incident [which, of the examples given, I think comes closest to unethical]. I think we're meant to see these situations as by & large driven by non-selfish and "right" intentions. Would it have been good for DD to have punished the three for their actions more often? Maybe so! Certainly some here have argued that Harry should have been brought up short more than once and faced some consequences for his actions. I wouldn't have objected too strongly to Hermione's having received some sort of punishment for generally breaking school rules, too, in these cases. But I don't think they'd ever be consequences as serious and those we'd expect to see for Umbridge or Draco & gang. Is that fair? Well, *I* think so, yes. I do think we're meant to question blind following of rules, decisions made which might hurt or endanger others. If H/R/H break some rules in the cause of fighting Voldy and evil, then I think we can expect punishment to be non-existent or light. Is this fair of JKR? That's up to each person and his/her own sense or morality. Some people [on the Christian right, especially] trash the books because they say JKR *glorifies* breaking rules. I don't think that's correct, but she certainly does show us that there are times when she thinks it's appropriate to do so. And I don't have a problem with most of that. There are others who object to JKR's one-sidedness, as I think GEO is doing in this thread. Why NOT punish Hermione if Draco, Lucius & Umbridge all get theirs in the end? Katie, Cory & I have each tried to answer that on grounds of INTENTIONS. *Yet* JKR has been criticized -? and more fairly so, imo -? for one-sidedness on the question of why she's shown us only "bad" Slytherins so far. She just *does* favor the heroes, the Gryffindors, Hufflepuffs & Ravenclaws. And for someone who's good at showing us all the grays of many of the (esp. adult) characters and of situations, with the houses she's still being awfully black & white. *That's* an inconsistency I can see being concerned about. Siriusly Snapey Susan, who's in a bit of a fog today, so I hope this makes some sense. From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Tue Dec 28 16:01:59 2004 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 16:01:59 -0000 Subject: Hermione In Trouble? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120670 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "greatelderone" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kate" > wrote: > > I think that there is a definite difference in Hermione & Company > > and Umbridge & Company. It lies in their INTENTIONS. Hermione is > > trying to protect people, help her friend and save Sirius while > > Umbridge is a lot like Voldy in the fact that she is power hungry > > and will go to any lengths to get it. I don't think that it was > > Hermione's intention for the centaurs to kill Umbridge, just > provide > > enough of a distraction for them to escape. > > GEO: How could Hermione not know that the centaurs were going to > kill Umbridge or at least do something awful to her. Remember she > was in the forest when they issued their threat in respect towards > Hagrid when they insinuated that they were going to kill him if it > were not for Harry and Hermione since they didn't slaugther foals. Hickengruendler: IMO, you are forgetting one thing. Umbridge wanted to Crucio Harry. Harry's life or sanity was in danger. Hermione just tried to save him. Therefore, whatever happened to Umbridge, was done out of self- defense? Where the centaurs are danger to Umbridge and did Hermione consider this? Probably, if not likely. Did Umbridge nonetheless deserve it? I say she did, because she wanted to torture a student (right after admitting that she wanted to soul-suck him as well). Hermione had to made a decision between Harry's life and sanity and Umbridge's life sanity, between an innocent schoolboy and an highly dangerous and evil woman. IMO, she chose right, simply because Harry's life is worthier than Umbridge's. This might sound harsh, and I am normally against self-justice or death penalty, but to give an example: If you have to risk Hitler's life, because he wants to kill Mother Theresa and you want to save her, what would you do? I honestly think this was the situation in which Hermione was. Hickengruendler From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Dec 28 16:18:00 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 16:18:00 -0000 Subject: (un)masking the DEs In-Reply-To: <20041228141126.11900.qmail@web53101.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120671 Magda: > I'm not sure that there was any reason why Voldemort named names in the graveyard in GOF. I'm more curious to know why he passed by others without naming them. > Pippin: We get the answer indirectly from Fudge. The only ones who were named were those who had already been tried. Presumably they can't be tried again for the same crimes. But letting the others know who they are might make it harder for them to deny their master next time, which to Voldemort's twisted way of thinking, is good. Pippin From gryffindor.phan at gmail.com Tue Dec 28 17:03:02 2004 From: gryffindor.phan at gmail.com (Arya) Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 17:03:02 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore as Order Founder (was: Warning Ron is Dumbledore post!) In-Reply-To: <3def328f04122714397853132a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120672 Patrick wrote: (snippage) As for your theories on The Order (re it being founded to battle Slytherin, not just VOldemort): it is indeed possible but the HPL notes that the OOtP was created by DD. (cite: http://www.hp-lexicon.org/wizards/order-phoenix.html) ---------------- I would like to note the Lexicon here is simply assuming this fact. In canon, all we have is this: [quote]'It's a secret society,' said Hermione quickly 'Dumbledore's in charge, he founded it. It's the people who fought against You-Know-Who last time.' [/quote] IMO, there is room for Hermione's stating that Dumbledore founded it to battle Voldemort to be either an inacurrate presumption on her part or on the part of whomever told her this. Also, we know the "children" were not exactly in the loop so this comment seems equally as likely to be merely overheard and even tertiary knowledge, which, as we know too well, is likely to misinterpretation and miscommunication. As far as I'm concerned, unless I hear it from Dumbledore himself, the idea that he founded the Order merely to counter Voldmort, is a rumour. A rumour believed, apparently, by Hermione, but a rumour nonetheless. Arya From ohneill_2001 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 28 17:31:02 2004 From: ohneill_2001 at yahoo.com (ohneill_2001) Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 17:31:02 -0000 Subject: Hermione In Trouble? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120673 SSSusan wrote: > I'm with Katie on this one, and Cory, I think you should be less > apologetic for holding the view you do! > Now Cory: Duly noted. :) On a more serious note, in expressing some reservations about JKR's message, I don't want to imply that I disagree with her. My objection to the message is more along the lines of its applicability to real life. I agree with the principle that rules are not absolute, and should be broken when the greater good requires it -- particularly when, as in OotP, the rules themselves exist for the purpose of oppressing a particular group or achieving some other evil purpose. My point is simply that, in the real world, that is rarely an easy ethical determination to make, because very few things or causes are purely "good" or "evil." I could pick up a newspaper right now and find about a half-dozen different instances of a perceived wrong being committed somewhere in the world, and in each case the alleged wrongdoer would justify his actions by claiming that the ends justify the means (out of a desire not to get off-topic and to avoid politics, I will refrain from doing so). Are these people right or wrong? It's all a matter of perspective. In short, I agree with JKR, but only because good and evil are so clearly delineated in the Potterverse. In real life, I usually do not buy into "ends justify the means" arguments. --Cory From yellows at aol.com Tue Dec 28 17:52:31 2004 From: yellows at aol.com (yellows at aol.com) Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 12:52:31 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Dumbledore as Order Founder (was: Warning Ron is Dumbledo... Message-ID: <55.69730eb2.2f02f75f@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120674 In a message dated 12/28/2004 12:07:26 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, gryffindor.phan at gmail.com writes: [quote]'It's a secret society,' said Hermione quickly 'Dumbledore's in charge, he founded it. It's the people who fought against You-Know-Who last time.' [/quote] IMO, there is room for Hermione's stating that Dumbledore founded it to battle Voldemort to be either an inacurrate presumption on her part or on the part of whomever told her this. Also, we know the "children" were not exactly in the loop so this comment seems equally as likely to be merely overheard and even tertiary knowledge, which, as we know too well, is likely to misinterpretation and miscommunication. As far as I'm concerned, unless I hear it from Dumbledore himself, the idea that he founded the Order merely to counter Voldmort, is a rumour. A rumour believed, apparently, by Hermione, but a rumour nonetheless. Perhaps I'm missing something, but I don't see where that quote says the Order was founded specifically for anything we know of. All I read is Dumbledore founded the Order, and they fought against Voldemort. You can infer that they were founded for the specific purpose of fighting Voldemort, but you can also infer that the Order was already in place when Voldemort came to power. Or, you could read that the people who fought Voldemort came to call themselves the Order of the Phoenix after quite a while of working together as an unofficial group. It could mean several things, and I believe Arya is right to point out that Harry, Ron, and Hermione know very little about the actual details. For all we know, Dumbledore has been running the Order of the Phoenix for most of his life, and they have been fighting all kinds of evils. Brief Chronicles [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Tue Dec 28 18:20:08 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 18:20:08 -0000 Subject: Hermione In Trouble? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120675 Now Cory: > On a more serious note, in expressing some reservations about JKR's > message, I don't want to imply that I disagree with her. My > objection to the message is more along the lines of its > applicability to real life. I agree with the principle that rules > are not absolute, and should be broken when the greater good > requires it -- particularly when, as in OotP, the rules themselves > exist for the purpose of oppressing a particular group or achieving > some other evil purpose. > > My point is simply that, in the real world, that is rarely an easy > ethical determination to make, because very few things or causes > are purely "good" or "evil." > In short, I agree with JKR, but only because good and evil are so > clearly delineated in the Potterverse. In real life, I usually do > not buy into "ends justify the means" arguments. SSSusan: Thanks for the clarification, Cory. I understand what you are saying, and of course I agree that there is little in our world which is so clearly B/W in terms of good or evil. It's funny, perhaps, that I do still think JKR is trying to teach us about "gray"... but I think it works because of the B/W endpoints; that is, if things were too gray with the good vs. evil, then we have a real dilemma for much of the readership, I think. In *my* mind, the Hermione behaviors pointed to in this thread are waaaaay towards "the white end of the gray" and so therefore her rule- breaking is all right. But if things weren't so clearly separated between good & evil in the Order/Trio vs. Voldy/DEs or the Order/Trio vs. Umbridge, then Hermione's actions wouldn't necessarily be okay. Which is perhaps why, of the examples discussed, I'm most distressed by the Marietta situation, over the Rita Skeeter or DJU in the forest or stealing Snape's supplies situations. Does that make any sense? Perhaps the Marietta thing really *was* just as much protection for DD/The Order/The Greater Good as the other two examples... but it just seems in that one case perhaps there would have been a less excessive way to catch the snitch?? Siriusly Snapey Susan From ohneill_2001 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 28 18:54:39 2004 From: ohneill_2001 at yahoo.com (ohneill_2001) Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 18:54:39 -0000 Subject: Hermione In Trouble? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120676 SSSusan wrote: > Which is perhaps why, of the examples discussed, I'm most distressed > by the Marietta situation, over the Rita Skeeter or DJU in the forest > or stealing Snape's supplies situations. Does that make any sense? > Perhaps the Marietta thing really *was* just as much protection for > DD/The Order/The Greater Good as the other two examples... but it > just seems in that one case perhaps there would have been a less > excessive way to catch the snitch?? Now Cory: I agree about the hex on Marietta. In my opinion, what Hermione should have done was to hex the parchment, but *warn* the members when the signed up that the sheet was hexed, and that by signing the sheet they were agreeing to keep the secret or suffer the consequences. Regarding the Skeeter situation -- blackmail is generally wrong, but there is a certain poetic justice to Hermione's actions. Skeeter was using her position to ruin Harry's life (and hers, to a lesser extent), and she was using the fact that she is an animagus to aid herself in that task. I don't feel a great deal of outrage over the fact that it is now being used against her. As for the centaurs, I would say that situation is more comparable to her SPEW crusade than to the other items listed here. It is another case of Hermione failing to understand the nature of creatures that have different value systems than her own. I don't think she intended for the centaurs to cause Umbridge any serious harm. She made a serious misjudgement, and if not for Grawp (and Dumbledore saving Umbridge), her mistake could have gotten all of them killed, but I don't think her intentions were as evil as they've been made out by some. --Cory From houseofbohacek at earthlink.net Tue Dec 28 19:19:29 2004 From: houseofbohacek at earthlink.net (klyanthea) Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 19:19:29 -0000 Subject: (Filk) Pettigrew Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120677 Pettigrew A filk by Gail B. to the tune of _I Need You_ by the Beatles. Midi is here: http://www.geocities.com/SunsetStrip/Studio/7779/beatle09.html (PoA, chapter 10) McGonagall: Potter and Black's friend when he was at school Hero-worshiped them, though they'd ridicule As far as talent-wise, he didn't match their size Pettigrew Fudge: He found Sirius and tried to corner Didn't have a chance, he was a goner Peter wasn't as fast: he was caught in the blast He was through McGonagall: That boy was a fool Should have left Black to the Ministry He could never duel I'm feeling so bad, for treating Peter so sharply Fudge: In a Muggle street, said an eye-witness They had heard poor Pete sobbing in distress He loudly called the names of Lily and of James "How could you?" That's when Black did it Peter didn't even have a prayer I'll never forget The scene on that day: screaming and bodies everywhere Once the curse was cast by Black the traitor What was left behind inside the crater? His blood-stained garment and A fragment from his hand Pettigrew Pettigrew Pettigrew -Gail B. From gbannister10 at aol.com Tue Dec 28 19:58:31 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 19:58:31 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore as Order Founder (was: Warning Ron is Dumbledore post!) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120678 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Arya" wrote: Arya: > IMO, there is room for Hermione's stating that Dumbledore founded it > to battle Voldemort to be either an inacurrate presumption on her part > or on the part of whomever told her this. Also, we know the > "children" were not exactly in the loop so this comment seems equally > as likely to be merely overheard and even tertiary knowledge, which, > as we know too well, is likely to misinterpretation and > miscommunication. As far as I'm concerned, unless I hear it from > Dumbledore himself, the idea that he founded the Order merely to > counter Voldmort, is a rumour. A rumour believed, apparently, by > Hermione, but a rumour nonetheless. Geoff: But, on the other hand, Hermione is notorious for beavering away to make sure she's got her facts right. I think she would be likely to go off to try to confirm anything told her under the umbrella of "I think I'm right in saying that...." I'll sit on the fence on this one, chaps and chapesses. From bboyminn at yahoo.com Tue Dec 28 20:06:09 2004 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 20:06:09 -0000 Subject: Draco's Presence when Mrs. Norris Found In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120679 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > > Steve/bboyminn wrote: > > > Next, consider this, why are ANY of the students on that floor at > > that time? ... only Gryffindor and Ravenclaw have dorms in towers, > > ... This .... particular floor does not seem to be the regular route > > to Gryffindor tower, so at best, a stray Ravenclaw or two might have > past by that area. > Potioncat: > I recall a quote from JKR that said she didn't really have all the > Hogwart's locations in her head and if she placed them differently > from book to book, she'd chalk it up to magic. ... And in SS/PS it > is said that passageways change directions on different days and > that staircases like to move around. bboyminn: Well, MAGIC is a good an explanation as any for the error in the location, and is internally consistent in the Potter-verse. However, I don't think 'Magic' quite explains how and why the bulk of the student body including students who live in the opposite direction (underground) arrive at that particular location. While it is complete and utter speculation that someone informed the teachers and students of trouble at that location which is what brought them running, it is still reasonable, and while it isn't supported by the books, neither is it contradicted. There are all kinds of things that happen 'off-page' out of our's and Harry's sight. Not even necessarily saying that my explanation is the correct one, only that this inconsistancy is most likely resolved by an 'off-page' explanation. In other words, there is a logical reason, we just haven't been allowed to see it. Just a thought. Steve/bboyminn (was bboy_mn) From willsonkmom at msn.com Tue Dec 28 23:09:39 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 23:09:39 -0000 Subject: So long (was Did Snape Try to Warn James at GH? )( In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120680 Kneasy wrote: > Strolled through Christmas (yes, very good, thank you; > roast goose and a superb Guigal Cote Rotie), now it's almost > New Year, traditionally an opportunity to review the past and > set targets for the future. > Enjoy the new book, > Potioncat: Good luck Kneasy! You'll be missed. Potioncat From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 29 01:15:32 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 01:15:32 -0000 Subject: Snape at Godrics Hollow In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120681 Magda wrote: > So let's posit a scenario: Snape is at Hogwarts, as a teacher from > September 1 1981 on. He tells Dumbledore that Voldemort is after the Potters and the Potters go into hiding. He continues to spy, and > tells Dumbledore that the Potters' secret-keeper has turned traitor. Carol responds: While I agree that Snape must have tried to warn James in some way, I don't think he could have gone to Godric's Hollow without being told the location by Peter himself, which goes against everything we know about Snape's later reactions and events in PoA. Also, I don't see how he could have continued to spy while he was teaching at Hogwarts, much less have been absent from school (presumably without leave) to be a GH when the Potters were killed. I can see him being at school and alerting Dumbledore to some change in his Dark Mark. I can *almost* see him trying and failing to alert James to the treachery of one of his friends at some location other than GH while he was still a spy and not yet a teacher, but the problem there is that he would have had to give away his identity as a(n ex-) Death Eater still attending their meetings in order to inform James of these developments. It makes more sense (to me) for him to tell Dumbledore and have Dumbledore tell James. James would still be ignoring Severus's warning, though he wouldn't know whose it was, and Severus would still resent his stubborn loyalty to Sirius despite Sirius's seeming treachery. ("How dare he ignore my warning and let himself be murdered, leaving me with this unfulfilled life debt?") I really, really hope that HBP answers at least some of our questions about Snape *and* Godric's Hollow, but I'm betting that all connections between the two are indirect. I.e., I think Snape knew that James was in danger and tried to warn him *indirectly*, but I don't think he knew about GH, much less that he was actually there. And, like Eloise somewhere in this thread, I'm taking at face value (till canon proves otherwise) the statement that the voice at Godric's Hollow was James's. Carol, hoping that everyone who celebrates Christmas had a merry one (Today is the Fourth Day of Christmas, if anyone besides me is counting.) From vmonte at yahoo.com Wed Dec 29 01:21:26 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 01:21:26 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore as Order Founder (The Order an ancient society) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120682 Arya wrote: IMO, there is room for Hermione's stating that Dumbledore founded it to battle Voldemort to be either an inacurrate presumption on her part or on the part of whomever told her this. Also, we know the "children" were not exactly in the loop so this comment seems equally as likely to be merely overheard and even tertiary knowledge, which, as we know too well, is likely to misinterpretation and miscommunication. As far as I'm concerned, unless I hear it from Dumbledore himself, the idea that he founded the Order merely to counter Voldmort, is a rumour. A rumour believed, apparently, by Hermione, but a rumour nonetheless. vmonte responds: I keep wondering why JKR would have the brain attack at all, unless she needed another way to pass information about the past. (She used the penseive for this reason--to give us a glimpse into Dumbledore, James and Snape's past.) The brain attack has to be another way that JKR is going to give us information about the past. My guess is that we are going to get information about Godric and Salazar. If so, the brain would have to be the brain of someone from that time. If it's not SS or GG's brain, then it's possible it's Flamel's. And who is to say that Flamel wasn't older than what was known. Should we unconditionally trust what was printed in a book about Flamel? Even Hermione's wizard book (I cannot remember the name of the book now) didn't give the whole story about the house elves. The Order is named after a bird that is continuously reborn. IMO, it makes sense if the Order was an ancient society that resurfaces in times of trouble. (Flamel could have once been the leader of the Order, and he may have trained DD to take over this role.) Vivian From snow15145 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 29 01:28:49 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 01:28:49 -0000 Subject: Did Snape Try to Warn James at GH? (Re: Here is an interesting Snape one) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120683 Kneasy: IMO a more significant question would be: "Does the charm have to be re-set if the SK changes?" Snow: Was the charm in place before Sirius suggested changing secret keeper? Kneasy snipped: Suppose DD dropped off the twig. If knowledge of GP were then erased from the minds of everyone that DD has told, nobody would ever be able to find the Headquarters again. It seems logical that once told, always know. Extrapolating that to GH anyone Sirius told would also retain the knowledge, even after he stopped being SK. Particularly necessary in a war situation where an SK could be killed. It'd be a bit careless to lose buildings and supporters by being too clever for your own good with the spellwork. Snow: Dumbledore suggested the Fidelius charm along with himself as secret keeper to the Potters but I don't think Dumbledore was the one who engaged the charm. Whatever reason the Potters had for not allowing Dumbledore to be their secret keeper would be the same reason they wouldn't allow him to perform the charm. I think Dumbledore had his own resources as to finding GH that did not come from the secret keeper(s) divulgence. As for Sirius knowing or being allowed to remember the whereabouts of GH after changing secret keeper status, wouldn't that debunk the meaning "changing" secret keeper? Sirius had his own way of contacting James if need be and that was the old two- way-mirrors. Kneasy snipped: Strolled through Christmas (yes, very good, thank you; roast goose and a superb Guigal Cote Rotie), now it's almost New Year, traditionally an opportunity to review the past and set targets for the future. Time to move on, I think. Fresh woods and pastures new - that kind of stuff. After almost a thousand posts to the board enthusiasm has been replaced by a combination of ennui and an increasing disappointment brought on by the decline in quality of recent posts, something some members know I've been concerned about for some time. They ought to, I've bent their ears often enough saying so. Too few posts now with style and grace and wit; posts that one can enjoy and appreciate even while disagreeing. "Oh, my Elkins and my blue!squeak long ago" I'll still be posting of course, but it won't be here. A few of you may have seen me surface on another site a couple of months back while I was exploring possible alternative groups (there's some *very* familiar names among the members) and that's where Kneasy will decline into (hopefully) disreputable dotage. Snow: Sorry to hear you've taken the route like so many have before you. I have always appreciated the fact that you could hear so many of the same topics repeatedly and still respond in that ole' Kneasy flare. You will definitely be missed for your philosophical input and prophetic theories. Happy theorizing to you wherever you feel most comfortable. Snow From snow15145 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 29 01:39:53 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 01:39:53 -0000 Subject: (un)masking the DEs In-Reply-To: <20041228141126.11900.qmail@web53101.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120684 Magda: I agree that Voldemort would have to take care that losing one DE to the authorities didn't unravel the entire group. "Need to know" is a good policy. Also, from his megamaniacal POV, it means no one knows more than he does, which is not a bad thing when you're trying to keep control. Voldemort's relationship with Lucius is different from the others'. For one thing, he needs Lucius and his wealth a lot more than he needs some of the others, which gives Lucius some small advantage in dealing with the Boss. However it's also an additional danger because Voldemort doesn't like having to need someone else. I'm not sure that there was any reason why Voldemort named names in the graveyard in GOF. I'm more curious to know why he passed by others without naming them. Snow: Why does Voldemort treat Lucius differently? I doubt that it is for Lucius's wealth because what does Voldemort need money for? If he did perchance need money he could always curse someone of wealth to do his bidding for him. I think there is more to Lucius and all that he seems to know about Riddle/Voldemort. I do think Lucius knows things about Voldemort that no one else in the death-eater clan does. For instance, when the death-eaters confronted Harry and Co. at the DOM, Bella was shocked and dismayed at the revelation that Voldemort was not a pureblood wizard but Lucius was very calm as if he had been privy to that information all along. It doesn't seem to bother Lucius that Voldemort is half muggle and yet that is what the death-eaters have been told they are supposedly fighting against. Lucius also knew, and was in possession, of the diary that Riddle left behind and more importantly its contents. This still remains a mystery to me as to why Lucius was attempting to revive the young Tom Riddle via the diary (who had been known to his closest friends as Voldemort by then) when only two years later he ran from the Dark Mark at the Quidditch World Cup. It just doesn't add up. Does Lucius want his Master back or not? Is Voldemort Master over Lucius, it doesn't appear so in the Graveyard, all Lucius received as punishment was a stern talking to, which didn't appear to affect Lucius much. In fact, Arthur Weasley gets more of a reaction out of Lucius than Voldemort did. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 29 01:54:24 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 01:54:24 -0000 Subject: The Animagi Black Was:Do Dobby & Lucius know the prophecy? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120685 Sen wrote: > > I think once Pettigrew finally decided to head over to the DE camp, > he spilled his guts about what he knew. This would be the little > rat's moment of glory. Being the center of attention and giving a > *lot* of extremely important info to Voldemort himself (if not the > DE's as well). Not only did he know to tell about the animagi factor > & Lupin being a werewolf, he'd be able to tell about what's going in > on in the Order. If there did happen to be a DE eavesdropper during > the prophecy moment, he'd be able to tell about the Potters AND the > Longbottoms having boys that fit the criteria (I don't know of any > other way they would know otherwise). Carol responds: I think you're right that he told Voldy about the two boys who fit the Prophecy, but I doubt very much if he revealed anything about his own animagus status unless forced to through Voldy's Legilimency. Clearly the other DEs didn't know about it or they would have guessed that the rat didn't die in the duel with Sirius Black. Nor did Snape know that any of the Marauders were animagi; he apparently didn't believe the story that Peter was a rat until Sirius transformed in front of him in GoF. Most likely Voldy let Peter keep his secret because he didn't want his spy's identity, or his animagus abilities, to be known by the DEs, whom he didn't trust any more than he trusted his enemies. (I don't think that Peter himself was a DE in VW1; his Dark Mark in GoF appears to be a recent acquisition.) Snape tells Black in OoP that Lucius Malfoy has found out about his ability to transform himself into a dog. Almost certainly Wormtail has revealed that information to the Death Eaters, possibly along with his own ability to transform into a rat and Lupin's secret identity as a werewolf. What I think Peter revealed to Voldy in his VW1 spy days (along with information related to the Potters) was the names of the Order members, which would enable the DEs to "pick them off one by one," as Lupin puts it in OoP. But agian, I don't think the DEs themselves knew who he was, and they certainly didn't know that he (or James or Sirius) was an animagus. Carol From bob.oliver at cox.net Wed Dec 29 01:53:29 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 01:53:29 -0000 Subject: JKR's Messages (was Re: Hermione In Trouble?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120686 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > > > SSSusan: > Thanks for the clarification, Cory. I understand what you are > saying, and of course I agree that there is little in our world which > is so clearly B/W in terms of good or evil. It's funny, perhaps, > that I do still think JKR is trying to teach us about "gray"... but I > think it works because of the B/W endpoints; that is, if things were > too gray with the good vs. evil, then we have a real dilemma for much > of the readership, I think. > Hmmm. I understand your point, Susan, and I agree with it to a certain extent. However, overall I disagree with the idea of JKR "teaching us" about anything, at least in any subtle or hard to see way. Oh, I don't deny that the books have messages. However, JKR is not some mystic dispensing pearls of Zen wisdom through her novels. IMO that is about as likely as the various "Puppetmaster! Dumbledore" theories floating around. JKR is a novelist, and a very good one, although I don't think she qualifies as one of the "greats," and I certainly wouldn't read her books for some kind of deep moral or psychological insight. I think in the end, when all is said and done, any themes JKR wants to illustrate will be fairly obvious. Most of the rest of what we argue about, be it Slytherin House or rule-breaking or Dumbledore's lapses or a lot of other things will fall under the heading of "plot mechanics." That is, I really don't think JKR is sending a subtle message at all through Hermione's rule breaking or Harry's. I think those actions are meant to be part of an enjoyable adventure sequence that keeps the plot moving along. In that regard one might just as well criticize Batman for not reading the Joker his rights or Indiana Jones for not following the International Convention on Antiquities. For that matter one might as well criticize Dumbledore for organizing and leading an organization that does not hesitate to break all sorts of rules and laws instead of putting together a political action group to oust Fudge at the next election. If there is a message about rule breaking to be heard I think when the seven books are over it will be painted rasberry red and beating us on the foot with a hammer. Indeed, Percy seems in some ways set up to be the "fall guy" for a message about adhering to the rules. Now, having said that I agree that JKR's writing brings up all sorts of ethical and moral questions, some of them rather intense. But frankly, I don't think she's interested in most of those questions. I, for one, wish she was more interested in some of them. I have said before that the implications of Dumbledore's speech in OOTP are problematic to say the least and in some ways horrifying. But I'm not altogether sure that JKR is interested in the tacit ethical and moral messages some people perceive her as sending. I suspect that ethical and moral questions she is interested in are the obvious ones, and I sometimes doubt she is even aware of many of the others. In other words, if someone asked her point blank about Harry and Hermione's rule-breaking, an honest answer (which she probably would not give as it would be impolite) might well be "Now it would be a mighty boring story if they just sat in Gryffindor Tower like good children, wouldn't it?" Lupinlore From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 29 02:22:33 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 02:22:33 -0000 Subject: Time travel with Mirror of Erised. Was: The mirror onthe website In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120687 > Geoff: I haven't looked at this one because I haven't given any deep thought to time travelling by Harry. Several posters have, in the past, said that they hoped JKR would not make a habit of using this as a plot device. To be quite frank, I would see it as a deus-ex-machina being used to get us out of awkward corners in the story. Perhaps I am a simple soul because I really don't see some of the more complicated plot theories - from the possible to the wacky - coming to pass. JKR has produced unusual twists in the story before but not on every page and although she likes to tease us with cryptic comments, I would feel unhappy with a story which finished up deluged with time-travelled and/or Polyjuiced characters coming out of the woodwork on every page in Book 7. Alla: Thank you for your answer. In many aspects of the books, I am quite simple soul too (meaning that I also don't see many complicated plot theories to come true - and of course I can be wrong) and if you were to tell me that time travel will appear in HBP for the first time, my answer will probably be something along of "Huh?". Nevertheless, time travel was ALREADY introduced to us, which to me and to me only means that JKR is not opposed to this plot device on principle, and she does tend to use some plot devices twice, therefore I think it may show up again. I also used to think that it will be a cop out on her part, but I kind of changed my mind, because I don't think the time travelling will be succesful. I speculate that somebody (say Harry) will try to go back and for example save his parents, but will not be succesful. I don't think it will play a part in the final resolution, but I think it will show up in some shape or form. Come to think of it - time travelling in PoA was done quite ellegantly , so maybe I will enjoy it again. Just my opinion, Alla From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 29 02:51:41 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 02:51:41 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore as Order Founder (The Order an ancient society) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120688 Vmonte: snip. The Order is named after a bird that is continuously reborn. IMO, it makes sense if the Order was an ancient society that resurfaces in times of trouble. (Flamel could have once been the leader of the Order, and he may have trained DD to take over this role.) Alla: Interesting. Could you ellaborate on this one a bit, please? I can probably accept Dumbledore as being some kind of Godric reincarnation in the struggle good v evil, but what do you mean "Order resurfaces in the time of trouble"? Are you suggesting that all its members are being reborn? ( I am not sure if I agree, if it is so) Do you simply mean that Order becomes active when evil comes and recruits new members every time? Alla From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 29 03:00:45 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 03:00:45 -0000 Subject: Theoretical boundaries / Dursleys' abuse In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120689 Carol earlier: > > > Quite possibly, unlike Melville, she isn't even aware of the > problem. I'd venture to say that most readers don't notice it, > either, except to be vaguely bothered by the change in "tone." How > much of it derives from Harry's state of mind in OoP, I can't say > without rereading the book and choosing some representative > passages. If the book as a whole is deliberately dark and the > darkness reflects Harry's POV, perhaps it isn't the flaw that it > seems to be. > Maybe Books 6 and 7 will have the same "voice" and it will seem more > appropriate as more people die. Or maybe it's a fluke, reflecting > Harry's anger in OoP. Ask me what I think on this topic when HBP is > out. :-) > > > > Alla responded: > > Here is my question. Am I understanding you correctly that you are > undecided yet whether the change in the narrative tone in OOP was > warranted or not? > > Because I am of the opinion that she did it quite deliberately. > > Do you think it hurts the quality of the book or not? Carol replies: To be frank, I'm not sure that JKR's sophistication as an author equals her imaginative genius. My *feeling* (which I can't in any way support with facts) is that her narrative voice "grew with the telling" (to borrow Tolkien's description of his own book). IOW, it developed in part through the conscious decision to use Harry as the POV character for most of the books but also in part *unconsciously* as she gained more of a grasp on her characters, especially Harry, and as events grew darker. Also, I think she attempted to raise the reading level a little with each book to match the age of the characters. A fifth grader reading at grade level is going to find GoF difficult and OoP perhaps impossible. But I'm not sure that the decision to force the reader to see the action through Harry's eyes so that his identity is almost merged with that of the third-person narrator (who still is not Harry but has no objectivity, no observations other than those colored by Harry's emotions and preconceptions) was deliberate. She must know that the narrator's voice in chapter 1 of GoF is different from that in the rest of the book, but did she think that readers wouldn't notice? Or that it didn't matter because she had to get that information in and there was no other way? I'm curious as to how she'll relay the events at Godric's Hollow. Whose viewpoint could she possibly use except Voldemort's--or an objective narrator different from the narrative voice that relates the story from Harry's POV? And what about the chapter that focuses on Draco? Will she find that the narrative voice used for OoP will no longer work? Again, to be honest, I think she considers plot developments (planting her clues and red herrings) as of primary importance, showing growth and development in her main characters (consistent with their ages and experiences) second, the readers' supposed intellectual development and sense of humor third--and not much else. Her awareness of style and narrative technique seems, well, limited. Not to be overly critical--I love the books. But genius rises above flaws in style and narrative techinique, as "Moby Dick" supremely illustrates. (And Melville could have used a modern editor, too, to fix those paragraph-length sentences. He actually asked his editor to "sprinkle in a lot of commas" because he didn't know where they went.) So the short answer to your question is "I don't know" whether the changes are deliberate (a factual question which only JKR can truthfully or fully answer) or whether they're warranted (a matter of opinion on which readers will always be free to disagree). I didn't enjoy OoP nearly as much as GoF (except for the Snape scenes). I hope JKR can distance *herself* from Harry in HBP so the narrator can see him more clearly and objectively. But that probably won't happen. We're too firmly entrenched in the unreliable third-person limited point of view. The only hope, then, is that *Harry*, and hence the narrator, will see more clearly with less subjectivity and emotional distortion in the next two books. At least that's what I'm hoping to see in HBP. Carol From vmonte at yahoo.com Wed Dec 29 03:21:47 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 03:21:47 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore as Order Founder (The Order an ancient society) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120690 Alla wrote: Do you simply mean that Order becomes active when evil comes and recruits new members every time? vmonte responds: Yes. I also think that Flamel was once the leader of the Order and that he trained DD to be his successor. vivian From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Dec 29 03:28:28 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 03:28:28 -0000 Subject: JKR's Messages (was Re: Hermione In Trouble?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120691 SSSusan: > > ... I do still think JKR is trying to teach us about "gray"... > > but I think it works because of the B/W endpoints; that is, if > > things were too gray with the good vs. evil, then we have a real > > dilemma for much of the readership, I think. Lupinlore: > Hmmm. I understand your point, Susan, and I agree with it to a > certain extent. However, overall I disagree with the idea of > JKR "teaching us" about anything, at least in any subtle or hard > to see way. Oh, I don't deny that the books have messages. > However, JKR is not some mystic dispensing pearls of Zen wisdom > through her novels. > Most of the rest of what we argue about, be it Slytherin House or > rule-breaking or Dumbledore's lapses or a lot of other things will > fall under the heading of "plot mechanics." That is, I really > don't think JKR is sending a subtle message at all through > Hermione's rule breaking or Harry's. I think those actions are > meant to be part of an enjoyable adventure sequence that keeps the > plot moving along. > > Now, having said that I agree that JKR's writing brings up all > sorts of ethical and moral questions, some of them rather > intense. But frankly, I don't think she's interested in most of > those questions. I, for one, wish she was more interested in some > of them. > In other words, if someone asked her point blank about Harry and > Hermione's rule-breaking, an honest answer (which she probably > would not give as it would be impolite) might well be "Now it > would be a mighty boring story if they just sat in Gryffindor > Tower like good children, wouldn't it?" SSSusan: Hey, Lupinlore. You may be right. It'll be interesting to see, when we arrive at the end, just how we feel about this topic and what we've been shown -- or not. I am reminded of the remarks JKR made about how she isn't writing a morality story so much as that morality springs naturally from it. Wait -- it makes more sense to go get the quote itself. In fact, I see now I've thought of two different ones. Here's the first, from the Electronic Telegraph, July '98: "Rowling admits that the moral drive is important to her, but stresses that it is not contrived. 'The morals tend to come quite naturally, often as I approach the end I realise what I've been writing about. But I don't think my books are preachy - Harry breaks rules quite routinely.'" And here's the second, from "Fighting In a Battle That Will Never Be Won" (Oct. '03): "Indeed, I didn't intend to teach or preach to children. In fact, I think that, except for some rare exceptions, fiction literature works for children lose interest when the author is more focused in teaching morals to their readers than in captivating them with his or her tale. "Nevertheless, I've always believed that Harry Potter books are highly moral. I wanted to portray the ambiguity of a society where intolerance, cruelty, hypocrisy and corruption are frequent, so I could better show how heroic it can be, no matter what your age is, fighting in a battle that will never be won. I also wanted to reflect the fact that life between 11 and 17 years old can be hard and confusing, even if one has a magic wand." SSSusan again: Certainly she talks about captivating readers with the tale, which supports what you're saying, but I think these are also an indication that she *does* think she's sending a message or two to us. It's interesting that she mentions the rule-breaking specifically, using it as an example that she's not preachy! There are also these two bits, the first from an AP story in October 1999: "I think they're very moral books. The children the protagonists have to make their own choices. I see all three of them as innately good people." and the second from Dateline, Nov. 2000: "Reporter Max Wyman snatched 15 minutes with the author and asked her if Harry Potter is serving as a moral figure for today's children to emulate. 'I see him as a good person but with a human underbelly,' Rowling told Wyman. 'He is vulnerable; he is frequently afraid; he has a very strong conscience, and it is my belief that with the overwhelming majority of human beings--maybe I`m a wild optimist--most people do try to do the right thing, by their own lights.'" SSSusan again: I think these two seem to support what I was saying upthread about Hermione (and Harry): that the INTENTION of the person matters when evaluating her/his actions. JKR sees the trio as "innately good," making their own choices, trying to do the right thing. I think this means JKR isn't especially likely to think that Hermione needs a comeuppance or punishment for her behaviors to date. Siriusly Snapey Susan From snow15145 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 29 03:38:11 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 03:38:11 -0000 Subject: Snape at Godrics Hollow In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120692 Carol: While I agree that Snape must have tried to warn James in some way, I don't think he could have gone to Godric's Hollow without being told the location by Peter himself, which goes against everything we know about Snape's later reactions and events in PoA. Also, I don't see how he could have continued to spy while he was teaching at Hogwarts, much less have been absent from school (presumably without leave) to be a GH when the Potters were killed. I can see him being at school and alerting Dumbledore to some change in his Dark Mark. I can *almost* see him trying and failing to alert James to the treachery of one of his friends at some location other than GH while he was still a spy and not yet a teacher, but the problem there is that he would have had to give away his identity as a(n ex-) Death Eater still attending their meetings in order to inform James of these developments. It makes more sense (to me) for him to tell Dumbledore and have Dumbledore tell James. James would still be ignoring Severus's warning, though he wouldn't know whose it was, and Severus would still resent his stubborn loyalty to Sirius despite Sirius's seeming treachery. ("How dare he ignore my warning and let himself be murdered, leaving me with this unfulfilled life debt?") Snow: I agree with most everything you had to say to this point but envisioned a little different scenario: where James was aware that Snape was Dumbledore's informant about the Potter's being in danger. Could you just imagine James face when Dumbledore tells him that he now trusts Snape, no specific details as to why, and reveals the information that Snape had divulged to him. Continuing, Dumbledore announces that, under the circumstances, they should hide under the Fidelius charm and that he should be secret keeper. James would be a little skeptical about the source of the information coming from a known death-eater whether Dumbledore trusted him or not. James tells Dumbledore that he will go into hiding with his family but Sirius being his best friend would be secret keeper. James did allow Dumbledore to know that Sirius would be his secret keeper (not something I would imagine you allow others to know when hiding under the Fidelius charm). James then talks over with Sirius everything that Dumbledore has told him. Sirius is more skeptical over the source of information (Snape) than James and even more so the fact that James allowed Dumbledore to know that he would be the secret keeper. Sirius decides that it may not be the best idea to have himself as secret keeper now that Dumbledore knows and may possibly confide in Snape, whom James nor Sirius trust even if Dumbledore does. This little scenario would explain why Dumbledore was not made secret keeper and why Sirius suggested to James to switch secret keepers. Snape would have known, at some point, from Dumbledore that James had told him he chose Sirius as secret keeper to have made the statement to Harry in the Shrieking Shack about being as arrogant as his father to believe he might be mistaken in Black. Snape felt he risked his life in confiding that the Potters were at great risk and that Sirius could not be trusted and James did not heed his entire warning therefore James was too arrogant. Snow From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 29 03:57:22 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 03:57:22 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore as Order Founder (The Order an ancient society) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120693 Alla wrote previously: Do you simply mean that Order becomes active when evil comes and recruits new members every time? Vmonte responds: Yes. I also think that Flamel was once the leader of the Order and that he trained DD to be his successor. Alla: Hmmm. Do you think Fawkes himself may play the bigger role in the Order activities than we know yet? Could Fawkes be some kind of "permanent leader" of the order? Maybe Phoenix magic somehow makes the human leader aware that the evil is coming? I think I am walking in the land of wild speculation here, but it is fun. :o) From pjarrett at gmail.com Tue Dec 28 22:04:17 2004 From: pjarrett at gmail.com (Patrick Jarrett) Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 17:04:17 -0500 Subject: Dumbledore as Order Founder (was: Warning Ron is Dumbledore post!) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3def328f041228140457b9420a@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120694 Arya: > As far as I'm concerned, unless I hear it from > Dumbledore himself, the idea that he founded the Order merely to > counter Voldmort, is a rumour. A rumour believed, apparently, by > Hermione, but a rumour nonetheless. Geoff: > But, on the other hand, Hermione is notorious for beavering away to > make sure she's got her facts right. > > I think she would be likely to go off to try to confirm anything told > her under the umbrella of "I think I'm right in saying that...." Patrick: Indeed, but she has been wrong on occasion... I think. So I concede it is possible that Arya could be right, but personally I feel that JKR would have little reason not to share that fact with us. And going back to vmonte's post concerning Flamel and OOtP, I still don't see a connection between them. If the connection is from the Stone in DD's protection, I don't think that was from any OOtP influence other than someone (DD?) realized the stone would be a tool for Voldy. -- Patrick, founder of the fictional fifth house of Hogwarts From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 29 04:03:00 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 04:03:00 -0000 Subject: Was Snape lurking in PoA or was he on his way to meet with Peter In-Reply-To: <009e01c4ea15$60229b30$8000a8c0@casa> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120695 vmonte wrote: > > > > In PoA Harry sees Peter's name on the map and goes looking for him inside the school. Is it possible that Snape was on his way to rendezvous with Peter but was accidentally caught by Harry? > > > Fridwulfa responded: > I'm sorry, but that's movie contamination. In the book Harry NEVER sees Peter's name on the map. Therefore he never goes looking for him in the middle of the night. Carol adds: And the Shrieking Shack is in Hogsmeade and off the school grounds, which means that Snape didn't see Peter's name on the map, either, though Lupin must have--while Ron and Scabbers were still above ground. Maybe Lupin saw Sirius, Ron, and PP disappear together into the Whomping Willow entrance. Snape would merely have seen the direction Lupin took and followed him, knowing where he was going. He would not have seen either Sirius or PP on the map. If he saw the kids' names, it would have been only TT Harry and Hermione. I don't think he expected to see them in the Shack until he found the invisibility cloak, and even then he was very cautious, expecting to (and hoping) rescue Harry from a murderer and his accomplice. It's pretty clear from PoA that Snape doesn't believe the PP/Scabbers story and shuts up only when he realizes that DD has somehow interfered and arranged Sirius's rescue through time-turning. There's no indication whatever that he knew about Peter Pettigrew being alive. Only when Padfoot transforms into Sirius in front of him in GoF is he finally and fully convinced of the animagus story--which makes Sirius innocent of the murder of Pettigrew and Pettigrew guilty of betraying the Potters. Snape is not in league with Peter; he wants Peter to be the innocent--and dead--victim of his treacherous "friend" Black, who also betrayed the Potters and tried to murder *him* (Severus) at sixteen. Snape's behavior in PoA can be explained only by the tenacity with which he holds this cherished view, which has been "true" for him for twelve long years. Carol From vmonte at yahoo.com Wed Dec 29 04:13:10 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 04:13:10 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore as Order Founder (The Order an ancient society) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120696 Alla wrote: Hmmm. Do you think Fawkes himself may play the bigger role in the Order activities than we know yet? Could Fawkes be some kind of "permanent leader" of the order? Maybe Phoenix magic somehow makes the human leader aware that the evil is coming? vmonte responds: I don't know. By the way, what do you think is the significance of Dumbledore's patronus being a Phoenix? Alla wrote: I think I am walking in the land of wild speculation here, but it is fun. :o) vmonte responds: Yes, I know how you feel, and it is fun. From nicouise at hotmail.com Tue Dec 28 23:56:40 2004 From: nicouise at hotmail.com (nicouise) Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 23:56:40 -0000 Subject: "in essence divided?" from OOTP chapter 22 Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120698 I apologise if this has been posted before but I could not find any history of it on the site and am a first time poster so please be gentle!!!!. I am re-reading OOTP as I am sure we all are in preparation for HBP and I am curious about the instrument which DD used in his office after HP had his dream of AW being attacked in the above named chapter. It is described as a fragile silver instrument and when DD tapped it with his wand it issued tiny puffs of pale smoke which then thickened into a serpent's head. DD murmured "naturally, naturally" to the serpent and then "in essence divided?" after which the serpent spilt into two snakes, "coiling and undulating in the dark air". DD is described as having a "dim look of satisfaction" before tapping the instrument with his wand again then the serpents vanished and he put the instrument back on it's table. Does anyone have any theories on what this instrument is, who he is communicating with? Is it a way of communicating with the Order? What does the comment "in essence divided?" posed as a question mean? Again I am sorry if this question has been posted before but I need your help on this!! From vmonte at yahoo.com Wed Dec 29 04:38:16 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 04:38:16 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore as Order Founder (was: Warning Ron is Dumbledore post!) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120699 Patrick wrote: And going back to vmonte's post concerning Flamel and OOtP, I still don't see a connection between them. If the connection is from the Stone in DD's protection, I don't think that was from any OOtP influence other than someone (DD?) realized the stone would be a tool for Voldy. vmonte responds: Well, there is a connection between Flamel and Dumbledore. They were "chemistry" partners. Dumbledore is only 150 years old and Flamel was/is? 666 years old at last count. By the time Dumbledore met Flamel, Flamel had already come up with the PS/SS, and probably countless other things. Was DD a partner, or an apprentice? How and where did they meet? Why did Dumbledore go after Grindelwald? And when are we going to learn the facts about this character? There is a lot information missing about the Dumbledore and Flamel relationship. Flamel seemed (seems?) to also be obsessed, like Voldemort, with longevity. Was he keeping himself alive because he wanted to finish what he started? Was/is he after something/someone? From luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca Wed Dec 29 04:47:31 2004 From: luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca (Brenda) Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 04:47:31 -0000 Subject: Snape at Godric's Hollow Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120700 Luckdragon: Just wondering what everyone thinks about the possibility that Snape is animagi (possibly a bat) and if that could play a role in: 1) Snape being able to overhear the secret keeper 2) Would a magical spell such as this include preventing an animal or person in animal form from finding the Potter's. Would sense of smell, taste, hearing of an animal be affected by the secret keeper spell? 3) Could Peter have been in his Rat form when he told Voldemort and Snape did not know Peter was animagi? From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Wed Dec 29 04:50:02 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 04:50:02 -0000 Subject: Death Eaters In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120701 > Carol responds: > > > The Dark Mark seems to be a grotesque caricature of Salazar Slytherin > with a Death's head (skull) for a face and a snake or basilisk for a > tongue. Tom Riddle, Slytherin's heir and himself a parseltongue, seems > to have taken a distorted version of the statue in the Chamber of > Secrets with the basilisk coming out of its mouth and adopted it as > his badge, to be burned into the arms of his Death Eaters so that they > can never forget their sworn allegiance to him and to be cast into the > air to mark the scene of their murders, claiming responsibility for > them (as gangs of thugs and terrorists do in the RW) and warning the > friends and relatives of the dead person of what they're about to > find. It's a boast, a kind of group pride in doing evil, for which > they get no individual credit because they are the masked and > anonymous servants of the master whose sign they have cast like a > curse into the darkness. And the more evil deeds they do, the more > often that Dark Mark appears, the more terror it will hold for the > ordinary citizens of the WW. > Neri: I certainly agree with the above, but I still maintain that the Dark Mark is very closely connected with the concept of "eating death". The evidence for that is not only in its shape, which could indeed be interpreted as merely a grotesque caricature of Salazar Slytherin. The additional evidence (which I recalled only now, and this is why I return to this post a bit late) is the incantation that produces the Dark Mark. This incantation is "morsmordere", which is interpreted by the Lexicon as follows: "mors" L. death + "mordere" L. to bite And this of course reminds me of "Voldemort", which means "flight from death" or "stealing death". So I still maintain that there is a very close connection between Voldemort's immortality, eating death, the Dark Mark and fear. Neri From gbannister10 at aol.com Wed Dec 29 07:58:33 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 07:58:33 -0000 Subject: "in essence divided?" from OOTP chapter 22 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120702 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nicouise" wrote: > > I apologise if this has been posted before but I could not find any > history of it on the site and am a first time poster so please be > gentle!!!!. I am re-reading OOTP as I am sure we all are in > preparation for HBP and I am curious about the instrument which DD > used in his office after HP had his dream of AW being attacked in > the above named chapter. > Again I am sorry if this question has been posted before but I need > your help on this!! Geoff: Don't apologise. Tracing old threads can be difficult. Looking into my own personal archive (which I keep for this very reason), I started a thread on the theme "The Smoke Serpent" which may help. It begins at message 79231. From pjarrett at gmail.com Wed Dec 29 05:55:50 2004 From: pjarrett at gmail.com (Patrick Jarrett) Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 00:55:50 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Dumbledore as Order Founder (was: Warning Ron is Dumbledore post!) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3def328f04122821555a4a5342@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120703 > vmonte responds: > Well, there is a connection between Flamel and Dumbledore. They > were "chemistry" partners. Dumbledore is only 150 years old and > Flamel was/is? 666 years old at last count. By the time Dumbledore > met Flamel, Flamel had already come up with the PS/SS, and probably > countless other things. Was DD a partner, or an apprentice? How and > where did they meet? > Why did Dumbledore go after Grindelwald? And when are we going to > learn the facts about this character? > There is a lot information missing about the Dumbledore and Flamel > relationship. > Flamel seemed (seems?) to also be obsessed, like Voldemort, with > longevity. Was he keeping himself alive because he wanted to finish > what he started? Was/is he after something/someone? Patrick: Indeed, there is a lot missing. That is why I said I didn't see the connections as they relate to the OOtP. Allow me to examine it as a reader. What does JKR gain from misleading us about the origins of OOtP? Is there a mystery to solve? Flamel was an off page character, never speaking directly for us to read. So why would JKR decide five books later to tell us more about him and expand the story of the OOtP? I don't see it. And my next point is to note the name. The Order of the Phoenix. DD -> Fawkes -> Phoenix. I suppose Flamel's long life might lend itself to the Phoenix, but it isn't as strong as the DD link. So, I remain unconvinced. I need more canon before I doubt the encyclopedic Hermione. -- Patrick From emhutch at sbcglobal.net Wed Dec 29 05:56:57 2004 From: emhutch at sbcglobal.net (eilissf1906) Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 05:56:57 -0000 Subject: "in essence divided?" from OOTP chapter 22 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120704 "nicouise" wrote: > ...Snip... > I am curious about the instrument which DD > used in his office after HP had his dream of AW being attacked in > the above named chapter. > It is described as a fragile silver instrument and when DD tapped > it with his wand it issued tiny puffs of pale smoke which then > thickened into a serpent's head. DD murmured "naturally, naturally" > to the serpent and then "in essence divided?" after which the > serpent spilt into two snakes, "coiling and undulating in the dark > air". DD is described as having a "dim look of satisfaction" before > tapping the instrument with his wand again then the serpents > vanished and he put the instrument back on it's table. > > Does anyone have any theories on what this instrument is, who he is > communicating with? Is it a way of communicating with the Order? > What does the comment "in essence divided?" posed as a question mean? Well, I've been puzzling this one out since OotP came out, and all I can think of is: Serpent= Harry/Voldie/whatever the wizard asked about. Divided= have been the same/connected/melding with one another but have/will split dim look= "well, we knew it would come to this, but at least it's happening at last." I have no ******* CLUE what the silvery thing is and it's driving me batty! Eilissf From gryffindor.phan at gmail.com Wed Dec 29 10:53:59 2004 From: gryffindor.phan at gmail.com (Arya) Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 10:53:59 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore as Order Founder (The Order an ancient society) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120705 "vmonte" wrote: The brain attack has to be another way that JKR is going to give us information about the past. My guess is that we are going to get information about Godric and Salazar. If so, the brain would have to be the brain of someone from that time. If it's not SS or GG's brain, then it's possible it's Flamel's. ---------- Arya now: I think the Sorting Hat is already a tool that does just this and could likely, IMHO, be used further by someone who is inquisitively inclined in regards to the time of the Founders. I tend to disagree that JKR needed to create a new plot device to give forth information on the Founders but I do agree the brain and it's "scarring thoughts" are most likely a plot device to be used. ----------- "vmonte" wrote: And who is to say that Flamel wasn't older than what was known. Should we unconditionally trust what was printed in a book about Flamel? Even Hermione's wizard book (I cannot remember the name of the book now) didn't give the whole story about the house elves. ----------- Arya now: Yes, but in the case of the house-elves, I believe whomever said, "History is writtten by the winners" sums it up best. ----------- "vmonte" wrote: The Order is named after a bird that is continuously reborn. IMO, it makes sense if the Order was an ancient society that resurfaces in times of trouble. ----------- Arya now: I much agree the Order is most likely an old one. It just makes sense given that the main conflict of the series is traceable to dating back over a thousand years and, as you said, the nature of the Phoenix suggests it's been renewed many times over the years. Arya From vmonte at yahoo.com Wed Dec 29 11:11:53 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 11:11:53 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore as Order Founder (The Order an ancient society) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120706 Arya now: I think the Sorting Hat is already a tool that does just this and could likely, IMHO, be used further by someone who is inquisitively inclined in regards to the time of the Founders. I tend to disagree that JKR needed to create a new plot device to give forth information on the Founders but I do agree the brain and it's "scarring thoughts" are most likely a plot device to be used. vmonte responds: Yes, the Sorting Hat could be used for information, but it's not uncommon for JKR to bring in devices that give information about the past. She also used Tom Riddle's diary in this manner (even though the diary did not give the whole truth about the past). What if the brain belongs to the half-blood prince? Could it be Godric Gryffindor's (the man later known as Nicolas Flamel)? Sorry, I couldn't help myself there. Thanks for your imput. vivian From packsim at aol.com Wed Dec 29 09:33:42 2004 From: packsim at aol.com (packsim at aol.com) Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 04:33:42 EST Subject: (un)masking the DEs Message-ID: <7a.69a2c713.2f03d3f6@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120707 Snow: This still remains a mystery to me as to why Lucius was attempting to revive the young Tom Riddle via the diary (who had been known to his closest friends as Voldemort by then) when only two years later he ran from the Dark Mark at the Quidditch World Cup. It just doesn't add up. Does Lucius want his Master back or not? Is Voldemort Master over Lucius, it doesn't appear so in the Graveyard, all Lucius received as punishment was a stern talking to, which didn't appear to affect Lucius much. In fact, Arthur Weasley gets more of a reaction out of Lucius than Voldemort did. Lisa the Lurker chimes in: Perhaps Lucius thought a young Tom Riddle would be easy to manipulate and control? After all the time, money, and sucking up Lucius has done, I don't think he really likes his second banana position. If he thought Voldemort was truly gone, then a figurehead replacement might be the best thing. As we're told Slytherins are ambitious by nature, it makes sense he would try for a leader who is more easily shaped to LM's needs and wants. If you can't be the power, be the power behind the throne. ~Lisa the Lurker (quietly returning to Lurker status) From vmonte at yahoo.com Wed Dec 29 11:51:56 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 11:51:56 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore as Order Founder (was: Warning Ron is Dumbledore post!) In-Reply-To: <3def328f04122821555a4a5342@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120708 Patrick wrote: Allow me to examine it as a reader. What does JKR gain from misleading us about the origins of OOtP? Is there a mystery to solve? Flamel was an off page character, never speaking directly for us to read. So why would JKR decide five books later to tell us more about him and expand the story of the OOtP? vmonte responds: I think there is a mystery to solve, and JKR likes to mislead her audience. How many cases of mistaken identity have there been in the series? People are never what they seem. Snape is a bad guy in SS/PS, but he turns out to be on the good side. Harry believes that Snape is harassing Quirrell, and it later turns out that Quirrell is bad. JKR introduces us to polyjuice in CoS (by having Harry and Ron impersonate Crabbe and Goyle) and later, Crouch Jr. uses it to impersonate Moody. Tom Riddle, school hero, is really a bad guy--aka Voldemort. Harry thinks he sees his father conjure a patronus in PoA, but it's really himself. Harry gets on the Knight bus and introduces himself as Neville, and later we learn that Neville (who we think is a nobody) might/or could have been another option for Voldemort to target. How about Trelawny, is she a fraud or not? And the printed word is never what it seems. Hermione's books do not tell the truth about the house elves. Rita Skeeter does not print the truth. Hermione considers Luna's paper to be garbage, yet it may turn out to have many truths in it. Tom Riddle's diary does not exactly give the truth about the past. And Lockhart never did anything he claims in his books. I'm also very curious about the Salazar and Godric relationship, as well as who Grindelwald was. JKR has to tell us who Grindelwald was-- don't you think? You said that it wouldn't make sense for JKR to mention Flamel in book one, and then to bring him back five books later. Why? She does this kind of stuff all the time. She likes to tease her readers with information. She slowly introduces ideas, people, and concepts. Then two, three, or four books later, she brings up these same ideas and people again. Just my opinion. And thanks for your comments. vivian From willsonkmom at msn.com Wed Dec 29 13:37:23 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 13:37:23 -0000 Subject: Snape at Godrics Hollow In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120709 > Carol: snip Also, I don't see how he could have continued to spy while he was teaching at Hogwarts, much less have been absent from school (presumably without leave) to be a GH when the Potters were killed. Potioncat: This is one of the reasons I don't think Snape began teaching until after LV was destroyed. However, I'm sure teachers leave the school from time to time. DD and Snape could make it work. Also, if this involves LV thinking that Snape is his spy, then he wouldn't expect Snape at meetings or at events that would blow his cover. Carol: It > makes more sense (to me) for him to tell Dumbledore and have > Dumbledore tell James. James would still be ignoring Severus's > warning, though he wouldn't know whose it was, and Severus would still > resent his stubborn loyalty to Sirius despite Sirius's seeming > treachery. ("How dare he ignore my warning and let himself be > murdered, leaving me with this unfulfilled life debt?") Potioncat: I think this is very likely. > > > Snow: snip James then talks over with Sirius everything > that Dumbledore has told him. Sirius is more skeptical over the > source of information (Snape) than James and even more so the fact > that James allowed Dumbledore to know that he would be the secret > keeper. Sirius decides that it may not be the best idea to have > himself as secret keeper now that Dumbledore knows and may possibly > confide in Snape, whom James nor Sirius trust even if Dumbledore > does. Potioncat: But as we learn in PoA and Gof, Black didn't know that Snape was a teacher at Hogwarts. Nor did he know that Snape had been a DE. Nor did he know that DD and Snape were working together. So, either James knew about Snape but didn't tell Black. Or James did not know who the informant was. Either way, Snape would still resent the fact that James continued to trust Black. If YoungManSnape was as secretive as CurrentSnape, then it's very likely James did not know who brought the information. From spoonmerlin at yahoo.com Wed Dec 29 12:06:46 2004 From: spoonmerlin at yahoo.com (Brent) Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 12:06:46 -0000 Subject: Crazy idea on why Harry's book 6 stay will be the shortest Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120710 I was thinking it seems every time Harry leaves Privot Drive it is either something good or bad: SS - Birthday visit after finding out he is a Wizard and leave for school as normal. Good CoS - He was in trouble for flying car, and the flying pudding. Bad PoA - He was in trouble for blowing up Marge. Bad GoF - Going to the QWC match. Good OotP - He was on trial for using the Patronus. Bad I think in HBP he might need a good thing to happen to make up for the crappy end of the last term. What if JKR has Harry get drafted to one of the Pro Quidditch teams like the Chudley Cannons or Puddlemere United. These have been mentioned in the books. Everyone in the books is always saying how good he is and Quidditch is a theme that keeps coming up. This would allow for the meeting of some new foreign wizards and maybe the introduction of the Half blood prince. While I know this is all guesswork it would be a nice opening. It could bring back some characters like Wood, Victor Krum, or Ludo Bagman (probably not going to happen but cool if he in disguised or something). Brent From pjarrett at gmail.com Wed Dec 29 12:44:33 2004 From: pjarrett at gmail.com (Patrick Jarrett) Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 07:44:33 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Dumbledore as Order Founder (was: Warning Ron is Dumbledore post!) In-Reply-To: References: <3def328f04122821555a4a5342@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <3def328f041229044432fef6c8@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120711 > vmonte responds: > I'm also very curious about the Salazar and Godric relationship, as > well as who Grindelwald was. JKR has to tell us who Grindelwald was-- > don't you think? You said that it wouldn't make sense for JKR to > mention Flamel in book one, and then to bring him back five books > later. Why? She does this kind of stuff all the time. She likes to > tease her readers with information. She slowly introduces ideas, > people, and concepts. Then two, three, or four books later, she > brings up these same ideas and people again. > Patrick: Indeed you are quite right, JKR has done a lot to mislead us in the past. But I simply cannot see where she is going if she has mislead us concerning the origin of the OOtP and Flamel's place in history. I'd also like to point out that Flamel is based on a real person and thus far JKR has steered clear of using real people as main characters or main plot tools. So, I remain skeptical. -- Patrick From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Dec 29 14:50:05 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 14:50:05 -0000 Subject: (un)masking the DEs In-Reply-To: <7a.69a2c713.2f03d3f6@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120712 Snow: > This still remains a mystery to me as to why Lucius was attempting > to revive the young Tom Riddle via the diary (who had been known to > his closest friends as Voldemort by then) when only two years later > he ran from the Dark Mark at the Quidditch World Cup. It just > doesn't add up. Does Lucius want his Master back or not? Is > Voldemort Master over Lucius, it doesn't appear so in the > Graveyard, all Lucius received as punishment was a stern talking > to, which didn't appear to affect Lucius much. In fact, Arthur > Weasley gets more of a reaction out of Lucius than Voldemort did. Lisa the Lurker chimes in: > Perhaps Lucius thought a young Tom Riddle would be easy to > manipulate and control? After all the time, money, and sucking up > Lucius has done, I don't think he really likes his second banana > position. If he thought Voldemort was truly gone, then a > figurehead replacement might be the best thing. As we're > told Slytherins are ambitious by nature, it makes sense he would > try for a leader who is more easily shaped to LM's needs and > wants. If you can't be the power, be the power behind the throne. SSSusan: Absolutely. This is the take I have, Lisa. It has been discussed here before, and I've argued that there are several possible reasons for Lucius' actions in CoS which would fit with someone who's attempting to gain power for HIMSELF, not attempting to bring back his "master." I've never been convinced that Lucius thought he could/would bring back Voldy via the diary scheme. Some of the ideas put forth have been that Lucius was trying to harm Harry [as Dobby seemed to believe would happen], either through blame or through actually having him killed; trying to discredit Arthur and the entire Weasley family after their sure-to-come-out role in the affair; wreaking havoc on Hogwarts and killing a few "mudbloods"; getting DD removed from Hogwarts for lack of control & protection of the students. These things would have done a couple of things for Lucius. One, it would have put him in the perfect spot for influencing who got to be next Hogwarts headmaster after DD's removal, a nice coup. Two, it would provide bragging rights with likeminded wizards, old DE friends, who'd be even more inclined to see him as powerful and follow him. The reason I've held fairly strongly to this view of things, rather than the story that Lucius was truly attempting to bring Voldy back, is his behavior in the graveyard. When Voldy chastized slippery Lucius for failing to come to his aid during those 12 years, Lucius DIDN'T protest with a "But, Master, two years ago I...." Some have argued that this wouldn't have been the time/place to have brought up such a (failed) attempt, but I just disagree with that; I think it would've been human nature to have protested & defended oneself, even with Voldy, *if* the truth would've proven your loyalty. The only "Lucius was trying to bring back Voldy" argument I could really see fitting with his personality & the graveyard scene are what Lisa is alluding to a bit here: the possibility that Lucius thought bringing back a young Tom Riddle, rather than a fully-grown, fully-developed Voldemort, might put him [Lucius] in a better position to control Tom, to retain more power. Worth watching closely, Lucius Malfoy is, I think. Siriusly Snapey Susan From hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk Wed Dec 29 15:04:05 2004 From: hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk (Hannah) Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 15:04:05 -0000 Subject: (un)masking the DEs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120713 > Magda wrote: > I agree that Voldemort would have to take care that losing one DE to the authorities didn't unravel the entire group. "Need to know" is a good policy. Also, from his megamaniacal POV, it means no one knows more than he does, which is not a bad thing when you're trying to keep control. > > Voldemort's relationship with Lucius is different from the others'. > For one thing, he needs Lucius and his wealth a lot more than he > needs some of the others, which gives Lucius some small advantage in > dealing with the Boss. However it's also an additional danger > because Voldemort doesn't like having to need someone else. > Snow wrote: > Lucius also knew, and was in possession, of the diary that Riddle > left behind and more importantly its contents. This still remains a mystery to me as to why Lucius was attempting to revive the young Tom Riddle via the diary (who had been known to his closest friends as Voldemort by then) when only two years later he ran from the Dark Mark at the Quidditch World Cup. It just doesn't add up. Does Lucius want his Master back or not? Hannah: Oh, I love discussing this! I still don't believe that Lucius intended to bring back LV using the diary. The idea that his intention was to manipulate the young Riddle is a plausible one, but the thing that bothers me is the timing. Why do it then? I think Lucius was happy enough to be rid of LV - I don't think he would enjoy all the subservience. To me, the diary was a way of unseating DD, discrediting Arthur Weasley (and his new Muggle-protection legislation), and possibly killing off Harry Potter. I don't think Lucius knew the full extent of its powers or realised that it could bring back a living young! Voldemort. As to Lucy's (very good) original question (welcome, by the way), I'd never considered why LV named those DE's. I think the dynamics between Lucius and LV are interesting. I see Lucius as being LV's right hand man, more important than any of the others. For instance, he took command in the DoM, and it would make sense with the way Harry and Draco have been set up. I don't think naming Lucius to the other DE's would necessarily pose a threat to Malfoy. He's already been accused of being a DE, tried and cleared. Also, the other DE's knowing Lucius' name won't give LV any more power over him - threatening to tell them may have been more effective than that. It will be interesting to see how Lucius gets out of Azkaban - will he escape by conventional means, or will he talk/ buy his way out of it? Hannah, wishing all at HPFGU a belated very happy Christmas and New Year, and sympathy to all those affected by the Asian eathquake. From ohneill_2001 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 29 14:59:26 2004 From: ohneill_2001 at yahoo.com (ohneill_2001) Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 14:59:26 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore as Order Founder (was: Warning Ron is Dumbledore post!) In-Reply-To: <3def328f041228140457b9420a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120714 Arya: > > As far as I'm concerned, unless I hear it from > > Dumbledore himself, the idea that he founded the Order merely to > > counter Voldmort, is a rumour. A rumour believed, apparently, by > > Hermione, but a rumour nonetheless. > Geoff: > > But, on the other hand, Hermione is notorious for beavering away to > > make sure she's got her facts right. > > > > I think she would be likely to go off to try to confirm anything told > > her under the umbrella of "I think I'm right in saying that...." Patrick: > Indeed, but she has been wrong on occasion... I think. So I concede it > is possible that Arya could be right, but personally I feel that JKR > would have little reason not to share that fact with us. Now Cory: As much as I love JKR's penchant for hiding the ball, I have to agree with Patrick on this one. As has been said many times before, sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. Another thought I had while reading this thread is this: if JKR wanted to keep the Order's origin a secret, why would she have Hermione mention it at all? She could have simply had Hermione tell us that it is a society led by Dumbledore that is fighting Voldemort. > -- Patrick, founder of the fictional fifth house of Hogwarts Cory again: I got a chuckle out of your sig, Patrick. The "fictional" fifth house of Hogwarts, as if the other four houses are not fictional, but are real live places. :) --Cory From yutu75es at yahoo.es Wed Dec 29 16:09:30 2004 From: yutu75es at yahoo.es (fridwulfa hagrid) Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 17:09:30 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] The Veil in the Chamber of Secrets? (was Re: more predictions from Jo) References: <20041227213538.84165.qmail@web81501.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <003301c4edc0$c907eca0$8000a8c0@casa> No: HPFGUIDX 120715 >> Jo / "mooseming" wrote: >> I don't know but I bet the veiled gateway started life there! > > > "sroginson" wrote: > My only question regarding the 'Veil' in the Chamber of Secrets... > How would it get from the Chamber into the Ministry/Dept. of Mysteries? > It would not relocate itself. It would require powerful magic. Someone, > or someones, would have to direct that action. If that is the case, how > is it that noone on the Hogwarts staff knew for sure whether there was a > Chamber of Secrets, or how to get into it? > Just curious... > Me (Fridwulfa): Life is not really that complicated. Slytherin himself could have taken the Veil with him when he left the Castle. When he dies (steping accidentally to the other side of the veil while pacing absentmindedly reading the D. P) his heirs/descendants/ascendants and greedy neighbours divide his fortune but no one seems to want the ugly thing, too big to keep in the living room, it doesn't really go with the curtains and the couch... so, of course, they donate it to the Ministry, and there it has been since. Cheers, Fridwulfa. From esmereldah at yahoo.com Wed Dec 29 14:04:03 2004 From: esmereldah at yahoo.com (Lucy Wooten) Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 06:04:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: Interesting trivia and Riddle-Grindlewald, was there a connection? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041229140403.41186.qmail@web52205.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120716 Many of you probably already know this, but the real-life Nicholas Flamel was the head of the Prierue de Sion, dedicated to the return of the Merovingian dynasty to power in southern France. He was born in 1330, which would have made him 660-661 years old during the time of SS. The real-life Flamel, known for his work with arcane literature, also developed an interest in alchemy. He claimed to have discovered an alchemical text entitled "The Sacred Book of Abraham the Jew, Prince, Priest, Levite, Astrologer and Philosopher to that Tribe of Jews who by the Wrath of God were Dispersed Among the Gauls". Also, on a totally unrelated note, notice that Tom Riddle went to school 50 years before 1992 (CoS), which would have made his attendance at Hogwarts coincide with the war with Grindlewald in 1942. I wonder if there was any other connection besides this coincidence, like the opening of the Chamber being an act of war. "esmereldah" From foxmoth at qnet.com Wed Dec 29 17:24:35 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 17:24:35 -0000 Subject: JKR's Messages (was Re: Hermione In Trouble?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120717 > > SSSusan again: I think these two seem to support what I was saying upthread about Hermione (and Harry): that the INTENTION of the person matters when evaluating her/his actions. JKR sees the trio as "innately good," making their own choices, trying to do the right thing. I think this means JKR isn't especially likely to think that Hermione needs a comeuppance or punishment for her behaviors to date.< Pippin: I'm not sure I agree. For one thing, Hermione has already had some comeuppances. The potion she made with stolen ingredients turned her into a cat-creature , and her attempt to sic the centaurs on Umbridge put her in mortal fear. I bet she will think twice before using the xenophobia of others as a weapon again. Both incidents use the human/beast metaphor which FBAWTFT makes explicit: the difference between a Being and a Beast is not intelligence or moral sense but the agreement to be governed by laws. Those who think there are universal moral laws and all right thinking people know what they are, (and thus no social contract is necessary) are probably not going to think the books are moral books, because that doesn't seem to be the point of view put forward. With Hermione, I think what JKR wants to show us is how easy it is to do the wrong thing *even when* one's intentions are good. I think Hermione was as wrong to punish Marietta the way she did as Umbridge was to use the quill on Harry; in both cases the argument is less that punishment was undeserved as that it was secret, cruel and unusual. Pippin From Gregory.Lynn at gmail.com Wed Dec 29 17:41:34 2004 From: Gregory.Lynn at gmail.com (Gregory Lynn) Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 12:41:34 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] "in essence divided?" from OOTP chapter 22 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120718 On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 23:56:40 -0000, nicouise wrote: > What does the comment "in essence divided?" posed as a question mean? > > Again I am sorry if this question has been posted before but I need > your help on this!! > I think this tiny fragment of a scene has the potential to be the key to everything. Otherwise, why bother to put it in at all? The key to figuring out what the events mean, I think, starts with figuring out what the words mean. "In essence divided" The question is whether the essence is divided or whether the division is the essence. Is there something important that has been divided or is there something otherwise unremarkable that has become significant because it was divided? I think it is the latter. Division and unity have been strong themes throughout the novels, from the urgings that the way to combat evil is for good to stick together, to the division between the magical and muggle worlds. I have this bizarre little theory that when Voldemort attacked Harry it was a sort of immovable object meeting and irresistable force kind of thing. The Avada Kedavra is unblockable, and the proteection Harry got from his mother must be equally powerful or Harry would have died, right? So what happens when two equally powerful things meet in conflict? Things go boom. Avada Kedavra always kills. Harry can't be killed. The curse rebounds and hits Voldie who has taken steps to ensure that he can't be killed. So my bizarre little theory is that this event is a metaphor for some other kind of split and that the various main characters are all different aspects of the same person. If you think about it, Hermione represents rational thought. She does what she is supposed to even when that means breaking rules and prioritizing real life crises ahead of things like homework. Ron represents irrational thought, or perhaps non rational thought would be a better way to put it. He has a spider phobia, he is self conscious about performance, et cetera. Voldemort, in this theory represents all the selfish bits of a person, wanting to live forever, wanting everyone to obey your every whim, et cetera. -- Gregory Lynn From ibotsjfvxfst at yahoo.co.uk Wed Dec 29 18:34:34 2004 From: ibotsjfvxfst at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?Hans=20Andr=E9a?=) Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 18:34:34 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Character Discussion: Harry (1) Message-ID: <20041229183434.18550.qmail@web25110.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120719 To those in whom the Lily has opened up its pure white heart, or the white Rose has unfolded its petals of supernal beauty, and so their heart aches with homesickness for the forgotten Kingdom of Unassailable Peace, a new soul is born: Harry James Potter. His coming has been prophesied from the beginning. This prophesy applies to every seeker whose heart is defeated by the repeated suffering of thousands of turns of the wheel. "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 . ." And at his birth a new star shines in the east. The baby is given a God-Father, Sirius. to be continued Hans ===== Hans Rieuwers see you at Harry Potter for Seekers http://groups.yahoo.com/group/harrypotterforseekers/ ___________________________________________________________ ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From manawydan at ntlworld.com Wed Dec 29 18:51:44 2004 From: manawydan at ntlworld.com (manawydan) Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 18:51:44 -0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] farewell Kneasy References: <1104285303.20726.90357.m3@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <000b01c4edd7$729167e0$704b6d51@f3b7j4> No: HPFGUIDX 120720 Kneasy signed off: >Time to move on, I think. Fresh woods and pastures new - that >kind of stuff. After almost a thousand posts to the board >enthusiasm has been replaced by a combination of ennui and >an increasing disappointment brought on by the decline in >quality of recent posts, something some members know I've >been concerned about for some time. They ought to, I've bent >their ears often enough saying so. Too few posts now with style >and grace and wit; posts that one can enjoy and appreciate even >while disagreeing. Sorry to see you go, seeing your address at the top of a post was pretty much a cert that it would be both entertaining and thought provoking. My own favourites were PuppetMaster!Dumbledore and BlackWidower!Snape, found them both extremely convincing. Take care Ffred O Benryn wleth hyd Luch Reon Cymru yn unfryd gerhyd Wrion Gwret dy Cymry yghymeiri From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Dec 29 20:36:17 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 20:36:17 -0000 Subject: JKR's Messages (was Re: Hermione In Trouble?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120721 SSSusan again: > > I think these two seem to support what I was saying upthread > > about Hermione (and Harry): that the INTENTION of the person > > matters when evaluating her/his actions. JKR sees the trio > > as "innately good," making their own choices, trying to do the > > right thing. I think this means JKR isn't especially likely to > > think that Hermione needs a comeuppance or punishment for her > > behaviors to date. Pippin: > I'm not sure I agree. For one thing, Hermione has already had > some comeuppances. The potion she made with stolen > ingredients turned her into a cat-creature , and her attempt to > sic the centaurs on Umbridge put her in mortal fear. I bet she > will think twice before using the xenophobia of others as a weapon > again. > > Both incidents use the human/beast metaphor which FBAWTFT > makes explicit: the difference between a Being and a Beast is > not intelligence or moral sense but the agreement to be > governed by laws. Those who think there are universal moral > laws and all right thinking people know what they are, (and thus > no social contract is necessary) are probably not going to think > the books are moral books, because that doesn't seem to be the > point of view put forward. > > With Hermione, I think what JKR wants to show us is how easy > it is to do the wrong thing *even when* one's intentions are good. > I think Hermione was as wrong to punish Marietta the way she > did as Umbridge was to use the quill on Harry; in both cases the > argument is less that punishment was undeserved as that it > was secret, cruel and unusual. SSSusan: I can see your point somewhat, Pippin, especially about Marietta. I think Hermione did go too far with that, and I think JKR *is* showing us that Hermione's intentions aren't enough with SPEW, either, as I mentioned in #120669. I'm not sure I'd put Hermione's actions re: DJU and the centaurs into this category, though. In cases like that, if Hermione gets a comeuppance, fine. What I'm saying is I hope I didn't imply that I believe there is a blanket "Everything they do is okay" hanging over the Trio, but rather that since JKR does call them "innately good" and does talk about fighting for what's right even if the battle will never be won, that she does make a distinction that "bad" or "wrong" behavior can definitely be good and right behavior if one's intentions are to fight evil/wrong. Maybe I misinterpreted what JKR meant by "the battle that will never be won" though -- I assumed she meant the battle against evil and hypocrisy and ignorance and prejudice, those things which will unfortunately always be with us. But maybe you've got a different take on it and can shed a different light on her remarks there. But anyway, I guess my specific question in response to your post here is: Would JKR really be telling us via the Hermione-turns-into- a-cat episode that she's being *punished* or getting her comeuppance for stealing? I mean, she may be the one who stole the ingredients, but the other two were equally involved in the process -- accessories, as it were -- and so if what she/they were doing was morally wrong & worthy of punishment/comeuppance, wouldn't JKR have had all *three* experience such consequence? Siriusly Snapey Susan From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 29 20:50:19 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 20:50:19 -0000 Subject: JKR's Messages (was Re: Hermione In Trouble?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120722 > SSSusan: snip. But anyway, I guess my specific question in response to your post here is: Would JKR really be telling us via the Hermione-turns-into- a-cat episode that she's being *punished* or getting her comeuppance for stealing? I mean, she may be the one who stole the ingredients, but the other two were equally involved in the process -- accessories, as it were -- and so if what she/they were doing was morally wrong & worthy of punishment/comeuppance, wouldn't JKR have had all *three* experience such consequence? Alla: I agree. I do not see Cat!Hermione as her punishment (just my opinion) at all, because otherwise Harry and Ron should have suffered too and in my opinion they did not. I think that for some reason JKR needed to exclude Hermione from being in Slytherin dormitory. I wish I knew why, but I don't see it as punishment. I do see her being scared in the forest as some kind of punishment though. Just my opinion. Alla From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Wed Dec 29 21:46:18 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 21:46:18 -0000 Subject: "in essence divided?" - The Essential Dumbledore In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120723 ">nicouise" wrote: > > Does anyone have any theories on what this instrument is, who he is > communicating with? Is it a way of communicating with the Order? > What does the comment "in essence divided?" posed as a question mean? Neri: I think that the specific meaning of "in essence divided" is pretty obvious. OTOH, the general implications of this little scene are much more interesting. First to the specific meaning: what I ask myself is why did DD conduct that small alchemical experiment just then, of all times? Harry was just brought to him in the middle of the night. It was an emergency situation and time was of the essence (erm... I mean of importance). DD had just determined that Harry saw the attack through the snake's eyes. He sends the portraits to check after Arthur and then, even before they are back to report, he conducts his little experiment. What is so important and urgent to determine at this stage? Obviously, ensuring that Harry is not possessed by Voldy. Read this whole incident from the moment Harry is brought into the office, and note how DD takes care not to look at Harry, certainly not into his eyes. He doesn't know if it is Harry or Voldemort!Harry he is talking to, and he doesn't take chances until finding out for sure with his alchemy. Another support for the two snakes representing Harry and Voldy comes for the possession scene in the MoM, when Harry feels as if he is trapped in the "coils" of a "creature", and this creature tries to become one with him until they are "fused by pain". Again the image of two-snakes/one-snake. I find the general implication of the "in essence divided" scene MUCH more interesting. It implies that DD is able to find out some ESSENTIAL truths about other people souls through his "alchemy". The silvery instruments are always described when we get to visit his office, and sometimes they are working. It means he is using them regularly. So what other things does he know "in essence"? This suggests to me a slightly different DD than he sometime appears in fanon. He is not the puppet-master and the spymaster, who is always snooping on other people actions and manipulating them. Rather he is interested with their inner souls, their heart desires and their key choices. He is not the Sherlock Holmes type, who is addicted to gathering information and thinks that god is in the details. On the contrary, DD thinks that god is in the essence. He is a master of the alchemy of souls, fate and deep truth. In the end talk of PoA, when Harry is distraught because Wormatil got away, the unperturbed DD tells him that "this is magic at its deepest, its most impenetrable" and also "The consequences of our actions are always so complicated, so diverse, that predicting the future is a very difficult business indeed". This doesn't sound to me like a puppet master who had just concluded a complicated but successful operation. It sounds like someone who doesn't know many of the details, but is very sure about the deep meaning of the event. Had he conducted another alchemical experiment that night? Did he examine the essence of Wormtail's soul? In the end talk of OotP DD says to Harry "I have watched you more closely than you can have imagined". This is a rather strong statement. Not merely "more closely than you thinks" but "more closely than you can have imagined". To me this doesn't imply portraits snooping after Harry's actions. It implies looking deeply into the essence of Harry's soul and fate. This might explain the apparent contradiction between DD's care for Harry and the WW of the one hand, and his seeming recklessness in leaving Harry and the trio to fight Voldemort alone of the other hand. DD is messing here with VERY deep stuff: immortality, ancient magic, life debts, a mysterious power more wonderful and terrible than anything else in the DoM, and a vogue prophecy that is critical for the future of the whole WW. And this prophecy says it is Harry, not DD, who has the mysterious power, and it is Harry, not DD, who has the only chance to vanquish the Dark Lord. If DD tries to manipulate Harry or even merely direct him, in effect he would be trying to be the one who vanquish the Dark Lord through Harry. Is this wise? Wouldn't it be a contradiction with the terms of the prophecy? Unlike Voldy, DD apparently has read all the legends and myths, so he knows that outwitting prophecies and meddling with mysterious powers is guaranteed to blow in your face. So he handles this "with the outmost care". He tries not to interfere too much, and he tries to understand the essence of things rather than manipulate the details. Neri From foxmoth at qnet.com Wed Dec 29 22:53:57 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 22:53:57 -0000 Subject: JKR's Messages (was Re: Hermione In Trouble?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120724 > SSSusan: > I can see your point somewhat, Pippin, especially about Marietta. I think Hermione did go too far with that, and I think JKR *is* showing us that Hermione's intentions aren't enough with SPEW, either, as I mentioned in #120669. I'm not sure I'd put Hermione's actions re: DJU and the centaurs into this category, though. In cases like that, if Hermione gets a comeuppance, fine. > > What I'm saying is I hope I didn't imply that I believe there is a blanket "Everything they do is okay" hanging over the Trio, but rather that since JKR does call them "innately good" and does talk about fighting for what's right even if the battle will never be won, that she does make a distinction that "bad" or "wrong" behavior can definitely be good and right behavior if one's intentions are to fight evil/wrong. > > Maybe I misinterpreted what JKR meant by "the battle that will never be won" though -- I assumed she meant the battle against evil and hypocrisy and ignorance and prejudice, those things which will unfortunately always be with us. But maybe you've got a different take on it and can shed a different light on her remarks there.< Pippin: I think what she means by innate goodness is that the Trio's sense of right and wrong is maturing on schedule and hasn't been damaged. They are revolted by cruelty, as Draco and Snape are not, and their ability to form attachments to others and their desire to see fair play are intact and broadening.That makes them very different from Tom Riddle. I think what JKR is saying is that the battle against the Riddles and their followers can never be won completely, because the only way to keep them from exploiting the rights and freedoms the rest of us enjoy is to deny them to everybody, and if we do that, they've won. SSSusan: > But anyway, I guess my specific question in response to your post here is: Would JKR really be telling us via the Hermione-turns-into- a-cat episode that she's being *punished* or getting her comeuppance for stealing? I mean, she may be the one who stole the ingredients, but the other two were equally involved in the process -- accessories, as it were -- and so if what she/they were doing was morally wrong & worthy of punishment/comeuppance, wouldn't JKR have had all *three* experience such consequence? < > Pippin: Harry *did* get a punishment. He's quite sure Snape embarrassed him in front of the duelling club for throwing the firework. Ron didn't take part in the theft, IIRC, so it makes sense that nothing much happened to him. Pippin From luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca Wed Dec 29 23:02:12 2004 From: luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca (Brenda) Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 23:02:12 -0000 Subject: In essence divided Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120725 Luckdragon: I keep wondering if this phrase doesn't imply more about the storyline than we may think. Division plays a role in many ways in the story: - division between the muggle and wizarding worlds - division of good vs. evil - division between various classes(caste) and species(racism) - poor vs. wealthy - division of students into houses according to character/personality traits. - division of wizards from various parts of the world, different schools, different quidditch teams etc. Then the references indicating a division/melding of sorts affecting Voldemort and Harry in particular: -Tom means twin -Voldemort gave some of himself to Harry when he tried to curse him. -Voldemort received some of Harry's blood in GOF. -Harry is able to see what Voldemort see's and vice versa -Harry and Voldemort are able to share some thoughts -Both have similar traits -Both have the ability to be powerful. -Both have similar features, characteristics, etc. -Both are orphans,similar parentage, schooling, etc Is Jo trying to show us how division causes discord and possibly the joining or melding together of all these fragmented pieces might end in harmony. I have no idea how this will come about. but it is food for thought. From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Dec 29 23:04:30 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 23:04:30 -0000 Subject: JKR's Messages (was Re: Hermione In Trouble?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120726 Pippin: > I think what she means by innate goodness is that the Trio's > sense of right and wrong is maturing on schedule and hasn't > been damaged. They are revolted by cruelty, as Draco and > Snape are not, and their ability to form attachments to others and > their desire to see fair play are intact and broadening.That > makes them very different from Tom Riddle. I think what JKR is > saying is that the battle against the Riddles and their followers > can never be won completely, because the only way to keep > them from exploiting the rights and freedoms the rest of us enjoy > is to deny them to everybody, and if we do that, they've won. SSSusan: I certainly wouldn't disagree at all with what you're saying about the trio's emotional and moral development. The question remaining is whether that is or isn't what JKR is referring to when she talks about the trio's "innate goodness." My thought was along the lines of the first part of what you described: that their sense of right & wrong is maturing on schedule and -- I would add -- appropriately, per JKR's definition of appropriately. SSSusan earlier: > > But anyway, I guess my specific question in response to your > > post here is: Would JKR really be telling us via the > > Hermione-turns-into- a-cat episode that she's being *punished* > > or getting her comeuppance for stealing? I mean, she may be > > the one who stole the ingredients, but the other two were > > equally involved in the process -- accessories, as it were -- > > and so if what she/they were doing was morally wrong & worthy > > of punishment/comeuppance, wouldn't JKR have had all *three* > > experience such consequence? Pippin: > Harry *did* get a punishment. He's quite sure Snape > embarrassed him in front of the duelling club for throwing the > firework. Ron didn't take part in the theft, IIRC, so it makes > sense that nothing much happened to him. SSSusan: Yes, Harry's convinced he got *Snape's* punishment. But is that the same thing as JKR's punishment? That's what I'm trying to gather: whether the "consequences" -- punishments, comeuppances, whatever one calls them -- are being shown as JUST, as RIGHT by the author; that is, that she *agrees* with them. *Is* that what we get with Harry being humiliated by Snape -- a clear message to the readership that Harry's getting what he truly deserves? Or is it just "one more instance" of Snape being unfair in Harry's eyes? Siriusly Snapey Susan From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 29 23:11:55 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 23:11:55 -0000 Subject: JKR's Messages (was Re: Hermione In Trouble?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120727 > Pippin: snip. With Hermione, I think what JKR wants to show us is how easy it is to do the wrong thing *even when* one's intentions are good. I think Hermione was as wrong to punish Marietta the way she did as Umbridge was to use the quill on Harry; in both cases the argument is less that punishment was undeserved as that it was secret, cruel and unusual. Alla: Pippin, I just realised when I read your last post that I did not address one point in this one. Am I understanding you correctly that in your opinion, in both situations Marietta and Harry deserved the punishment, but neither Hermione nor Umbrdige had a right to administer it? If I am, could you please clarify how Harry deserve the punishment from Umbridge, please? If I am wrong, could you please clarify it in general? You probably know from our earlier discussions that even though I do think that Hermione COULD be more frank with the group about the punishment (as if telling them what will happen BEFORE they sign), I am not really prepared to be very upset with her. Funnily enough, no matter how much I hate Umbridge, I am more upset with Hermione for leading her to centaurs than for doing what she did with Marietta. Not sure why. And going back to my original point, I don't see the comparison between two situations, since IMO Harry did NOT deserve the punishment AND it was cruel and unusual, and in Marietta's case it is arguable whether she deserved the punishment or not. (I'd say she did not deserve such harsh punishment, but what she did was quite bad too). Just my opinion Alla From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 29 23:17:30 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 23:17:30 -0000 Subject: JKR's Messages (was Re: Hermione In Trouble?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120728 > SSSusan: Yes, Harry's convinced he got *Snape's* punishment. But is that the same thing as JKR's punishment? That's what I'm trying to gather: whether the "consequences" -- punishments, comeuppances, whatever one calls them -- are being shown as JUST, as RIGHT by the author; that is, that she *agrees* with them. *Is* that what we get with Harry being humiliated by Snape -- a clear message to the readership that Harry's getting what he truly deserves? Or is it just "one more instance" of Snape being unfair in Harry's eyes? Alla: Hi, Susan! I think we are talking about some kind of "carmic payback" again. I think (and it is only my opinion) that JKR IS quite good at those, but I don't think this situation was "carmic payback", because Harry did not even think that he somehow DESERVED what he got. He did not have a single thought (unless I don't remember this part in canon, of course) that he was humiliated BECAUSE of past event. Two events were not connected in his mind in any way shape or form, therefore I think that we were just being shown Snape being Snape. Again, I tend to think that JKR DOES administer carmic punishments for some "gray" area events, but I am not sure that theft from Snape's office was one of them. Just my opinion, Alla From BrwNeil at aol.com Wed Dec 29 23:32:05 2004 From: BrwNeil at aol.com (BrwNeil at aol.com) Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 18:32:05 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] JKR's Messages (was Re: Hermione In Trouble?) Message-ID: <103.57ac0696.2f049875@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120729 In a message dated 12/29/2004 6:15:54 PM Eastern Standard Time, dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com writes: and in Marietta's case it is arguable whether she deserved the punishment or not. (I'd say she did not deserve such harsh punishment, but what she did was quite bad too). Just my opinion Alla I'd be interested in what type of punishment you would think appropriate. Remember, Umbridge most likely would have expelled every member of the DA if she had been able to prove they were having meetings. Marietta didn't care what happened to any of the members including Cho who was supposedly her friend. Marietta was not forced to attend the meetings. She could have quit after the meeting in Hogsmeade. There was no punishment for leaving the group. Somehow I feel that if Cho had been expelled, she would not have been nearly as fast to defend Marietta nor would she have considered what Hermione did as cruel. Neil [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 29 23:47:59 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 23:47:59 -0000 Subject: JKR's Messages (was Re: Hermione In Trouble?) In-Reply-To: <103.57ac0696.2f049875@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120730 Alla wrote previously: and in Marietta's case it is arguable whether she deserved the punishment or not. (I'd say she did not deserve such harsh punishment, but what she did was quite bad too). Neil: I'd be interested in what type of punishment you would think appropriate. Remember, Umbridge most likely would have expelled every member of the DA if she had been able to prove they were having meetings. Marietta didn't care what happened to any of the members including Cho who was supposedly her friend. Marietta was not forced to attend the meetings. She could have quit after the meeting in Hogsmeade. There was no punishment for leaving the group. Somehow I feel that if Cho had been expelled, she would not have been nearly as fast to defend Marietta nor would she have considered what Hermione did as cruel. Alla: I don't think that you read any of my posts about Marietta's situation in the past. :o) I DON'T defend her. I absolutely agree with you that she did not show any loyalty to her friends who all could have been expelled because of her betrayal, BUT Marietta's mother was Ministry employee and it is reasonable to think that girl did have some conflicting loyalties. What punishment would have been more appropriate? Frankly, I am OK with this one. What I am not sure if I am OK with or not is that Hermione did not WARN the group what is going to happen to someone who will betray them. Theoretically, if Marietta knew what is going to happen she would not sign in the first place. Although you can argue that if Marietta was not sure about the cause from the beginning, she had not business coming to DA meeting in the first place and here I would agree with you. Just my opinion, Alla From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Thu Dec 30 00:27:45 2004 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 00:27:45 -0000 Subject: JKR's Messages (was Re: Hermione In Trouble?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120731 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > Alla: > What I am not sure if I am OK with or not is that > Hermione did not WARN the group what is going to happen to someone > who will betray them. Hickengruendler: I think there are two reasons why Hermione did not tell anybody: 1.) She wanted to see which DA members were truly loyal. It's one thing to keep quiet about the group because you are loyal, it's another one to do it because you are scared. This way it was the DA member's own decision if they tell Umbridge or if they keep quiet. If Hermione had told them about the hex, than they surely wouldn't have said anything, but it would have been because they were forced to do it, not because of their own decisions. 2.) The loyal DA members might have felt offended, if they knew about the hex, and the group might not have become as close as they did. I can understand why Hermione didn't say anything, I have more problems with the hex itself. Especially that it was still on Marietta's face months later. Hickengruendler From bd88ns at blueyonder.co.uk Wed Dec 29 23:48:26 2004 From: bd88ns at blueyonder.co.uk (linda) Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 23:48:26 -0000 Subject: Snape at Godric's Hollow In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120732 > Luckdragon: > Just wondering what everyone thinks about the possibility that Snape > is animagi (possibly a bat) and if that could play a role in: > 1) Snape being able to overhear the secret keeper > 2) Would a magical spell such as this include preventing an animal > or person in animal form from finding the Potter's. Would sense of > smell, taste, hearing of an animal be affected by the secret keeper > spell? > 3) Could Peter have been in his Rat form when he told Voldemort and > Snape did not know Peter was animagi? Linda: I would imagine that Snape is an animagi but I always imagine him as a snake, a very small snake that no one will notice, especially in the shadows. I used to have a boss who moved around like Snape, carpet slippers we used to call him. You didn't know he was there until you literally turned round and bumped into him. However I doubt if Snape would ever had heard the secret keeper. If I was Voldemort and I had a mole like Peter, a marauder, in my pocket, he would be the best kept secret in the universe. I would not let any of my death eaters, no matter how high ranking, know that I had him and I probably wouldn't even mark him - far too risky. After all, if three people know a secret, then it isn't a secret anymore. I don't think any of the death eaters ever saw or heard Peter but would have been aware that something was going down. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 30 02:32:24 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 02:32:24 -0000 Subject: JKR's Messages (was Re: Hermione In Trouble?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120733 > Hickengruendler: I think there are two reasons why Hermione did not tell anybody: 1.) She wanted to see which DA members were truly loyal. It's one thing to keep quiet about the group because you are loyal, it's another one to do it because you are scared. This way it was the DA member's own decision if they tell Umbridge or if they keep quiet. If Hermione had told them about the hex, than they surely wouldn't have said anything, but it would have been because they were forced to do it, not because of their own decisions. Alla: Hmmm. That is true, as I said earlier if threat of punishment would have stopped Marietta from joining from the beginning, that would mean that she was not truly loyal in the first place, but just as it was any member's own decision whether to tell Umbridge or not, it should have been any member fully INFORMED decision whether to join or not in the first place. I mean, I think ends DO justify the means in this situation, I am just not sure that they are FULLY justify the means. Hickengruendler: The loyal DA members might have felt offended, if they knew about the hex, and the group might not have become as close as they did. I can understand why Hermione didn't say anything, I have more problems with the hex itself. Especially that it was still on Marietta's face months later. Alla: Are you saying that she simply should have used less cruel curse? But then I guess I also wonder which one. I suppose I may agree with you on principle, especially since punishment did not serve any helpful purpose for truly loyal DA members. I mean it served as deterring purpose, I guess and made an example of Marietta, something of look what happens to the traitors kind of thing, but it did not stop Umbridge from coming after them, if Kingsley would not interfere. I suppose something less cruel also could have been enough. Alla From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 30 02:51:14 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 02:51:14 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore as Order Founder (The Order an ancient society) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120734 Vmonte responds: By the way, what do you think is the significance of Dumbledore's patronus being a Phoenix? Alla: I do think that it may support the speculation that this is not Dumbledore's first reincarnation on Earth, besides that - not sure. It is quite obvious to everybody that Dumbledore and Fawkes share deep bond, I wonder what adventures they may have been involved it in the past? Maybe Fawkes somehow helped him to defeat Grindewald. From wmj007 at hotmail.com Thu Dec 30 00:42:00 2004 From: wmj007 at hotmail.com (engbama) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 00:42:00 -0000 Subject: "in essence divided?" from OOTP chapter 22 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120735 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nicouise" wrote: > What does the comment "in essence divided?" posed as a question mean? I would argue that it simply means is this: are Harry and LV the same essence (one could substitue soul here as well) or are they separate. They are obviously bound in other ways. Michael From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 30 03:16:23 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 03:16:23 -0000 Subject: Is this the post that we think was from JKR? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120736 Carol earlier: > > Yes, but I also notice that she refers to the author as JKR and to > DD as the narrator--that last is a glaring error and IMO makes it > > impossible that "Jo" is JKR. > > Is is necessarily a glaring error? We do not know yet what place > the "Potter" books occupy *in their own universe.* LOTR, after all, > is supposedly culled from the Red Book of Westmarch, being the > writings of Bilbo, Frodo, and Sam. Perhaps the HP books occupy a > similar place in the Potterverse, being memoirs written by > Dumbledore. In that case Dumbledore would be the "narrarator," i.e. > the fictional author, whereas JKR would be the author, i.e. the real > author. Carol responds: Actually, no, that's not correct (except in the distinction between author and narrator). The voice that narrates "The Hobbit" is that of an avuncular storyteller who says things like "I don't know what river it was, but it was a rushing red one"--clearly not the voice of Bilbo turned into a third-person narrator. Nor is the narrator of "Lord of the Rings," who knows things that none of the hobbits know, a composite of their voices and that of, say, Aragorn (who has no time to write books after becoming king) or Gandalf (who, so far as we know, never committed his vast knowledge to writing before sailing into the Uttermost West). Tolkien poses as a historian retelling the stories, using Bilbo's diary and Frodo's and Sam's accounts in the Red Book of Westmarch along with other materials as sources, often writing from the perspective of the hobbits but not necessarily using any particular hobbit as his POV character. The Pippin/Merry first-person segments of the story are noticeably different from the rest because they reflect those characters' personalities, especially Pippin's, which is distinctively lively and, well, hobbitish. In contrast, JKR is writing *mostly* from Harry's perspective (see my other posts on this topic) and almost never from Dumbledore's. Even in chapter 1 of SS/PS, we are seeing DD and MacGonagall from the outside, not privy to their thoughts. Neither the perspective nor the *voice* is Dumbledore's. JKR *could* be using *Harry* as a third-person narrator relating his own adventures in the future using the third person to trick us, but there's nothing recognizably Harryish about the voice, and in any case, that would be a bit of a cheap trick. Instead, she's using an ordinary anonymous personalityless third-person limited omniscient narrator who clearly is not one of the characters in the books, or even a historian. "Newt Scamander" and "Kennilworthy Whisp," the personae she adopted for FBWT and QTA, have distinctive voices. The nameless narrator of the HP books does not. If it were Dumbledore's voice, we would recognize it, if only by the puns and the eccentric dry humor. In any case, a character/narrator is always identified as such by the author, if only through a pose like the one Tolkien takes in his Preface and Appendices. If you don't understand what I mean by "voice," read the narrative portions of the books aloud. The "voice" of the narrator changes perceptibly between SS/PS and OoP, but it never sounds like Dumbledore or any other character whose style of speaking we might recognize (Ron or Snape or MacGonagall, for example). The narrator of the HP books is not a character but a device (which occasionally changes to fit the needs of the plot). And JKR, if she talked about the narrator at all, would know that. Carol, with apologies for the schoolmarmish "voice" of this post, for which you can blame my twenty years of teaching college English From vmonte at yahoo.com Thu Dec 30 03:42:15 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 03:42:15 -0000 Subject: Trelawny really bugs me... Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120737 vmonte: I know Trelawny has been discussed many times (by me and others) but I've been rereading the books and this character really annoys me. With so much talk about people being in charge of their own destinies and making the "right" choices, why does Dumbledore put so much faith into this woman's prophecies? Especially, when they can be read in so many different ways. (The daily horoscope is just as vague--although not as grim.) Sometimes I even wonder if someone is using this woman to keep Dumbledore and Voldemort busy/preoccupied while they make their own plans. Could she be someone's puppet? (Could Lucius and Snape be making their own plans?) Regardless, I hope that Harry makes the decision to disregard Trelawny's words and follow his own destiny. From bob.oliver at cox.net Thu Dec 30 03:56:21 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 03:56:21 -0000 Subject: Is this the post that we think was from JKR? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120738 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > Carol earlier: >SNIP<> > Carol responds: > Actually, no, that's not correct (except in the distinction between > author and narrator). The voice that narrates "The Hobbit" is that of > an avuncular storyteller who says things like "I don't know what river > it was, but it was a rushing red one"--clearly not the voice of Bilbo > turned into a third-person narrator. Nor is the narrator of "Lord of > the Rings," who knows things that none of the hobbits know, a > composite of their voices and that of, say, Aragorn (who has no time > to write books after becoming king) or Gandalf (who, so far as we > know, never committed his vast knowledge to writing before sailing > into the Uttermost West). Tolkien poses as a historian retelling the > stories, using Bilbo's diary and Frodo's and Sam's accounts in the Red > Book of Westmarch along with other materials as sources, often writing > from the perspective of the hobbits but not necessarily using any > particular hobbit as his POV character. The Pippin/Merry first- person > segments of the story are noticeably different from the rest because > they reflect those characters' personalities, especially Pippin's, > which is distinctively lively and, well, hobbitish. > > In contrast, JKR is writing *mostly* from Harry's perspective (see my > other posts on this topic) and almost never from Dumbledore's. Even in > chapter 1 of SS/PS, we are seeing DD and MacGonagall from the outside, > not privy to their thoughts. Neither the perspective nor the *voice* > is Dumbledore's. JKR *could* be using *Harry* as a third-person > narrator relating his own adventures in the future using the third > person to trick us, but there's nothing recognizably Harryish about > the voice, and in any case, that would be a bit of a cheap trick. > Instead, she's using an ordinary anonymous personalityless > third-person limited omniscient narrator who clearly is not one of the > characters in the books, or even a historian. "Newt Scamander" and > "Kennilworthy Whisp," the personae she adopted for FBWT and QTA, have > distinctive voices. The nameless narrator of the HP books does not. If > it were Dumbledore's voice, we would recognize it, if only by the puns > and the eccentric dry humor. In any case, a character/narrator is > always identified as such by the author, if only through a pose like > the one Tolkien takes in his Preface and Appendices. > > If you don't understand what I mean by "voice," read the narrative > portions of the books aloud. The "voice" of the narrator changes > perceptibly between SS/PS and OoP, but it never sounds like Dumbledore > or any other character whose style of speaking we might recognize (Ron > or Snape or MacGonagall, for example). The narrator of the HP books is > not a character but a device (which occasionally changes to fit the > needs of the plot). And JKR, if she talked about the narrator at all, > would know that. > > Carol, with apologies for the schoolmarmish "voice" of this post, for > which you can blame my twenty years of teaching college English I think your analysis is very impressive. The question though, is would JKR see things this way? If she says, for the sake of argument, that the books are by Dumbledore and hence he is the narrarator, I guess that sort of answers the question by fiat, whether it's a correct use of the terms in view of literary analysis or not. Incidentally, I don't think this is the case, and I really don't think the Mooseming posts are by JKR. However, it is important to remember that the rules of literary analysis are "descriptive," not "proscriptive." JKR can do whatever she wants, and if she wants to proclaim a certain character the narrarator -- even if that doesn't make much sense in terms of voice, style, etc. -- then nobody can stop her. Like I say, though, I don't think she will. Lupinlore From alexisnguyen at gmail.com Thu Dec 30 03:58:05 2004 From: alexisnguyen at gmail.com (Alexis) Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 22:58:05 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Hermione In Trouble? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120739 Cory wrote: > Regarding the Skeeter situation -- blackmail is generally wrong, but > there is a certain poetic justice to Hermione's actions. Skeeter was > using her position to ruin Harry's life (and hers, to a lesser > extent), and she was using the fact that she is an animagus to aid > herself in that task. I don't feel a great deal of outrage over the > fact that it is now being used against her. > > As for the centaurs, I would say that situation is more comparable to > her SPEW crusade than to the other items listed here. It is another > case of Hermione failing to understand the nature of creatures that > have different value systems than her own. I don't think she > intended for the centaurs to cause Umbridge any serious harm. She > made a serious misjudgement, and if not for Grawp (and Dumbledore > saving Umbridge), her mistake could have gotten all of them killed, > but I don't think her intentions were as evil as they've been made > out by some. Now Ali: I agree with this particular point of view. I realize that, at the beginning of this conversation, I said Hermione should get her comeuppance. I still think so. However, my reasoning behind this is that Hermione is still fairly young. We're all discussing her actions as if she's older, but the reality is that she is a young girl with little real experience with the world. To be sure, coming in contact with Voldemort and related conflicts teaches her a great deal, but those situations require little reasoning. Voldemort is clearly evil, as are those who side with him and commit atrocities alongside him. In situations like S.P.E.W. and Rita S, she acts very much like a young girl. She sees something she deems as wrong and sets about righting it without giving enough consideration to the issue that her world view may just be skewed or that there are those who might be grievously injured in the process. In my experience, those of us in the younger set tend to have overdeveloped senses of justice and tend not to give thought to the idea that we may be fallible. We see instances of this in the other HP kids as well, but it is more pronounced in Hermione because she is more active in her beliefs. When I talk about Hermione getting her comeuppance, I think of it more as life giving her a dose of reality. She needs to learn that just because she is exceptionally bright, she is not necessarily always right, and only in learning this can she reassess her ethical stance. ~Ali From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 30 04:22:25 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 04:22:25 -0000 Subject: Farewell to Kneasy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120740 Kneasy: > > Time to move on, I think. Fresh woods and pastures new - that > > kind of stuff. > > > Valky: > Well regardless what you might think of me, since we are 13,000 > simple humans it is too high a charge to expect you to *all* like > me...... *fluttering eyelashes* ;D ......... it has been a pleasure > to be in your company Kneasy and I bid you a fond farewell. Carol: And we didn't even get a chance to thank him for the Milton allusion. Carol, still in shock from the announcement that the irreplaceable, irrepressible Kneasy has left us From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 30 04:58:39 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 04:58:39 -0000 Subject: The known DEs (Was:Digest Number 5583) In-Reply-To: <002a01c4ecdd$15098710$5bc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120741 DuffyPoo wrote: > > I think Malfoy is like Bella and was well-known within the group. LV also mentioned, by name, Avery, Macnair, Crabbe, Goyle, Nott and all those present in the graveyard saw Pettigrew. From OotP we know that Malfoy is known to all three of the Lestranges, Crabbe and Goyle we already knew were 'friends', Jugson, Dolohov, Macnair, Avery, Mulciber and Rookwood. I think Malfoy is one of LV's right-hand men....but I also think Malfoy has plans of his own. :) JMO. Carol adds: It may or may not be relevant, but as Fudge indicates, the people identified by LV as present in the graveyard are the same men whose names had been publicized when they were accused of being Death Eaters and then cleared of the charges. LV doesn't hesitate to identify them in front of the other DEs because they're already known. But he *doesn't* name Snape, Karkaroff, or Barty Crouch Jr., which may mean that some of those present in the circle didn't know that those three had been DEs. And Wormtail is referred to only by his nickname, not by his real name, which probably indicates that most of them don't equate him with the "dead" Peter Pettigrew. It's possible, however, that PP wasn't a DE at all during VW1, only a spy. You're right that the other people named later on, the escapees from Azkaban, were all friends of Lucius Malfoy to begin with, members of the Slytherin gang that he probably led during his years at Hogwarts. But also, the Azkaban escapees all knew each other and their names were also public property, having been published in the Daily Prophet at the time of their arrests, their trials, and their joint escape. So the people whose names we don't know, those who are passed by in silence in the graveyard, are probably those whose identity can still be kept secret. They've neither been charged nor arrested, and even the other DEs evidently don't know who they are, just as they didn't know who Wormtail was--and, with the exception of Lucius Malfoy and Bellatrix, possibly still don't. Carol, trying to remember whether Wormtail had his mask on in the graveyard scene and wondering if any of the DEs in the graveyard were of the right age to recognize him as the "dead" Pettigrew From pixieberry at charter.net Thu Dec 30 05:25:35 2004 From: pixieberry at charter.net (Krystol) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 05:25:35 -0000 Subject: Did Snape Try to Warn James at GH? (Re: Here is an interesting Snape one) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120742 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" wrote: > Time to move on, I think. Fresh woods and pastures new - that > kind of stuff. Very, very sorry to see you go, Kneasy. Like others, I made a point to read posts with your name listed as author. Your lovely sarcastic wit and charm will be sorely missed. Take care. :) Pixieberry From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 30 05:49:30 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 05:49:30 -0000 Subject: Did Snape Try to Warn James at GH? (Re: Here is an interesting Snape one) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120743 Kneasy: > IMO a more significant question would be: > "Does the charm have to be re-set if the SK changes?" > > Snow: > Was the charm in place before Sirius suggested changing secret keeper? Carol responds: I think you're right, Snow. Sirius was never the Secret Keeper, AFWK. He talked James and Lily into using Peter instead. > > Kneasy: > > Extrapolating that to GH anyone Sirius told would also retain the > knowledge, even after he stopped being SK. > > Snow: > Dumbledore suggested the Fidelius charm along with himself as secret > keeper to the Potters but I don't think Dumbledore was the one who > engaged the charm. Whatever reason the Potters had for not allowing > Dumbledore to be their secret keeper would be the same reason they > wouldn't allow him to perform the charm. I think Dumbledore had his > own resources as to finding GH that did not come from the secret > keeper(s) divulgence. Carol responds: I agree with your first two sentences (not sure about the third). Clearly DD *didn't* perform the charm since he thought that Sirius was the SK. It must have been Lily who performed it while Sirius was present, and then at James and Lily's request, Peter would have told Sirius the location in their presence. (He couldn't have refused their request without giving himself away.) So Sirius would know where to go on the night of the murders, but he wouldn't have been able to tell anyone else where the Potters were hiding. (If Remus asked him, he would just have to say that he didn't know--or more truthfully, he quite literally couldn't say.) Snow: As for Sirius knowing or being allowed to > remember the whereabouts of GH after changing secret keeper status, > wouldn't that debunk the meaning "changing" secret keeper? Sirius had his own way of contacting James if need be and that was the old two-way-mirrors. Carol responds: I don't think that Sirius "knowing or being allowed to remember" would "'debunk'" the meaning of 'changing' secret keepers." He would know the secret himself, but he wouldn't be able to reveal it. (Possibly he used the mirrors as well, but he could have done so even if he knew the secret. And he must have known it to arrive at Godric's Hollow almost simultaneously with Hagrid--not instantly, because he rode his motorcycle rather than apparating--but still quickly, before Hagrid had taken Harry from the ruins.) Carol, who wishes it weren't all so complicated! From tonks_op at yahoo.com Thu Dec 30 06:13:18 2004 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 06:13:18 -0000 Subject: Trelawny really bugs me... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120744 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "vmonte" wrote: > > vmonte: > I know Trelawny has been discussed many times (by me and others) but I've been rereading the books and this character really annoys me. With so much talk about people being in charge of their own destinies and making the "right" choices, why does Dumbledore put so much faith into this woman's prophecies? Tonks: DD only puts faith is one of her prophecies. And he can tell the differece between a true prophecy and a false one. He does not have a high regard for divination at all. Tonks_op From tonks_op at yahoo.com Thu Dec 30 06:16:17 2004 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 06:16:17 -0000 Subject: Farewell to Kneasy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120745 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > Kneasy: > > > Time to move on, I think. Fresh woods and pastures new - that > > > kind of stuff. > Carol: > And we didn't even get a chance to thank him for the Milton allusion. > > Carol, still in shock from the announcement that the irreplaceable, > irrepressible Kneasy has left us Tonks: I'll bet he will be back after the 6th book has come out. Tonks_op From eggplant9998 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 30 07:39:25 2004 From: eggplant9998 at yahoo.com (eggplant9998) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 07:39:25 -0000 Subject: Marietta and Hermione (was JKR's Messages ) (was Re: Hermione In Trouble?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120746 "pippin_999" wrote: > I think Hermione was as wrong to punish > Marietta the way she did as Umbridge > was to use the quill on Harry So, you think a breakout in acne is too severe a punishment for a piece of scum like Marietta. Let me ask you something Pippin: During World War 2 what do you think would have happened to a member of the French Resistance who was caught betraying her comrades to the Nazis? Do you think she'd get acne or a bullet in the brain? This is no longer kid stuff, this is serious business, they are in a WAR, and in a war sometimes very good people have to do very bad things, one hell of a lot worse than giving somebody acne. It's unfortunate but true, you need a strong stomach to be a good warrior. Marietta got far more mercy than she deserved for her treachery and betrayal. If Hermione had done less I would have lost all respect for her and labeled her a terminally boring and completely useless goody two shoes. Pippin, you also seem to think Hermione was wrong to trick Umbridge and let her be kidnapped by the unicorns; Good heavens, that vile woman was about to torture Harry, probably to death as Harry is not the sort to ever give in. And it all would have happened too if Hermione hadn't been smart enough to thing of a solution. And yet you say she did wrong. Ridiculous. Eggplant From n2fgc at arrl.net Thu Dec 30 12:13:31 2004 From: n2fgc at arrl.net (Mrs.) Lee Storm (God Is The Healing Force) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 07:13:31 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Harry's cupboard was Re: Theoretical boundaries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120747 I know I've been out of the loop lately, and someone may have posted this, but I'm gonna say it anyway. :-) Sometimes when people are in horrid conditions, they actually look to rats or spiders for company or, at the very least, something to watch. I got the impression that Harry really couldn't watch TV except whatever and whenever the Dursley's were watching. From the beginning of PS, Harry has been at the whims of the Dursleys, i.e., the first scene in the cupboard is where Petunia is shrieking for him to get up (PS-US Chap 2): ["Are you up yet?" she demanded. "Nearly," said Harry. "Well, get a move on, I want you to look after the bacon. And don't you dare let it burn, I want everything perfect on Duddy's birthday." Harry groaned. "What did you say?" his aunt snapped through the door. "Nothing, nothing ..."] Now, this is before Harry gets any letter, and it seems clear to me that Petunia and Vernon and Dudders could really care less about Harry as a whole person. He's useful to them as a cross between a servant and a pet...I hate to put it that way, but that's how I see it. Then, in the same chapter, it's clear they don't want him to be a part of their family group. They only take "the boy" with them because there's no one else with whom they can leave him. He's made to feel like a very unwanted part of their plans. Again, this is all before Harry gets the letters. Now, granted, Harry's past (his wizarding folks) is, I'm sure, uppermost in the Dursleys' minds, but... Returning to the subject of the spiders, casting all the infinite theories of fears and strengths aside, perhaps in his own way, he viewed the spiders as company, as pets even. They were something for him to watch, something for him to, perhaps, commiserate with. When people are in dire conditions, they may resort to what might be considered strange outlooks to us, but to them, these things are just a part of life. Not being allowed a dog or cat, not ever really getting anything of his very own...only the used or broken hand-me-downs of a spoiled cousin, hey...the spiders are in his world, so to speak, and they're his (Petunia doesn't want them), and they're something alive and interesting to watch. Just a few rambling and random thinkings from a lady who wants a vacation...Bad!! :-) Hope you all have a blessed and fulfilling 2005! Cheers, Lee :-) Do not walk behind me, | Lee Storm I may not care to lead; | N2FGC Do not walk before me; | n2fgc at arrl.net (or) I may not care to follow; | n2fgc at optonline.net Walk beside me, and be my friend. From silvanaroven at yahoo.de Thu Dec 30 08:23:25 2004 From: silvanaroven at yahoo.de (Silvana Roven) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 09:23:25 +0100 Subject: AW: Crazy idea on why Harry's book 6 stay will be the shortest In-Reply-To: <1104374004.58509.20801.m21@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120748 Brent: > ... > I think in HBP he might need a good thing to happen to make up for > the crappy end of the last term. What if JKR has Harry get drafted > to one of the Pro Quidditch teams like the Chudley Cannons or > Puddlemere United. These have been mentioned in the books. Everyone > in the books is always saying how good he is and Quidditch is a theme > that keeps coming up. This would allow for the meeting of some new > foreign wizards and maybe the introduction of the Half blood prince. > Silvana: Harry has been banished from Quidditch for lifetime by Umbridge. Has this ban been canceled already??? I can't remember reading about it anywhere. All I can recall is Ron (?) hoping the ban would be null and void after Umbridge left. Greetings Silvana - who mostly is a lurker ;-) From bogus@does.not.exist.com Thu Dec 30 08:23:27 2004 From: bogus@does.not.exist.com () Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 09:23:27 +0100 Subject: The Veil, HP & LOTR [was: Re: The Veil in the Chamber of Secrets?] In-Reply-To: <1104374004.58509.20801.m21@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120749 > Fridwulfa: > Life is not really that complicated. Slytherin himself could have > taken the > Veil with him when he left the Castle. > When he dies (steping accidentally to the other side of the veil while > pacing absentmindedly reading the D. P) his > heirs/descendants/ascendants and > greedy neighbours divide his fortune but no one seems to want the ugly > thing, too big to keep in the living room, it doesn't really go with the > curtains and the couch... so, of course, they donate it to the > Ministry, and > there it has been since. > Silvana: I like to compare the characters JKR develops with Tolkien's LOTR. JKR herself once stated writing her books she was inspired by Tolkien's work. I made up some ideas of who might be who, but I had doubts about who is Aragorn. I admit that I thought of Ron because of the Quidditch-jingle "Weasley is our king". But it didn't fit that good - Ron seems more to be Sam. Reading your suggestion about Slytherin himself falling through the Veil, I came up with another idea: How about Sirius being Aragorn? Then the Ministry of Magic might be Helms' Deep and Sirius falling through the Veil might be a comparable parallel of Aragorn calling the Army of the Dead for help. So maybe Sirius WILL come back and bring some people with him who fell through the Veil - even Slytherin himself - to help defeat Voldemort (= Sauron). For all we know Voldemort was in Slytherin-house and Sauron has been a student of a former dark lord... Which location might be Minas Tirith the White City? I don't think it's Hogwarts... Maybe it could be No. 12 Grimmauld Place... IF Siruis is Aragorn this would be the place he heirs... Comparing the other characters here is my list: Harry Potter = Frodo Baggins Ron Weasley = Sam Gamgee Peter Pettigrew (Wormtail) = Wormtongue Dumbledore = Gandalf Fred & George Weasley = Merry & Pippin Lucius Malfoy = Saruman Rubeus Hagrid = Treebeard I'm not sure about: Lupin = Faramir Fudge = Theoden I still wonder about who might be comparable to: Hermione Granger Severus Snape the other stuff-members the other Weasleys What do you think??? Sorry if it is too weird. Greetings Silvana From esmereldah at yahoo.com Thu Dec 30 11:08:58 2004 From: esmereldah at yahoo.com (Lucy Wooten) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 03:08:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] JKR's Messages (was Re: Hermione In Trouble?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041230110858.1628.qmail@web52204.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120750 Alla: I suppose I may agree with you on principle, especially since punishment did not serve any helpful purpose for truly loyal DA members. I mean it served as deterring purpose, I guess and made an example of Marietta, something of look what happens to the traitors kind of thing, but it did not stop Umbridge from coming after them, if Kingsley would not interfere. Esmereldah: I guess Hermione wanted to remind people of just what Marietta did. People sometimes have a tendency to forget or not to believe, especially if the culprit displays a personality people do not associate with the kind of person who could commit such a crime. An example from the books is Lockhart. The girl fooled Cho Chang and the rest as to her intent for a substantial period of time. The fact that Chang still defends Marietta tells us that Marietta must be very persuasive. Even if the traitor never tried anything like that again, Hermione couldn't afford to take that chance. From ohneill_2001 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 30 14:31:45 2004 From: ohneill_2001 at yahoo.com (ohneill_2001) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 14:31:45 -0000 Subject: Crazy idea on why Harry's book 6 stay will be the shortest In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120751 Silvana wrote: > Harry has been banished from Quidditch for lifetime by Umbridge. > Has this ban been canceled already??? I can't remember reading > about it anywhere. All I can recall is Ron (?) hoping the ban > would be null and void after Umbridge left. Now Cory: My understanding of Umbridge's ban was that he is banned from playing Quidditch *at Hogwarts*. I don't think she had the authority to stop him from ever playing again, anywhere in the world. Thus, if he were drafted to a pro team, I think he could play. --Cory From lea_petra at yahoo.com Thu Dec 30 14:12:46 2004 From: lea_petra at yahoo.com (Mari Lea) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 06:12:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Harry's cupboard was Re: Theoretical boundaries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041230141246.97204.qmail@web60003.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120752 I am replying to this thread with some general ideas that have popped into my head. 1. Closets are not that bad. Both my husband and I can tell you this from experience. In college, the bedroom he got was a walk in closet, so he knows what is it like to actually live in one. And when I was working third shift, I slept in our closet, because of how dark it could get. Mainly you get used to the situation, you have to be tolerant and learn how to make a small space interesting. Since Harry probably grew up with the closet as his room, he learned how to cope with it. It's not the size of the room, but how the person learns to cope with it. Until Harry really began to find his own place he seemed very passive. This was a coping device. And it should not be a surprise that he has so much bottled up anger inside. 2. The Dursleys really only care what others think of them, including the wizarding world. It was only after they got the letters addressed to Harry Potter, under the stairs, did they even consider giving Harry a real bedroom. I think it was a shock to them to realize that someone knew what was going on in that house. I think they needed a jolt. I also think that if there was ever a chance of the Dursleys treating Harry far worse, (Abuse and Neglect to the point of putting Harry's life in danger) Dumbledore would have stepped in long before. Uncle Vernon seems to be a man that could cross the line and really hurt someone with his temper, but he hasn't yet. So I think the Dursleys, although they treat Harry badly, they do have a few lines they do not cross. Which shows a level of control. On the other hand, if they had wanted any interaction with the wizarding world, Harry would have been the perfect vehicle for them. What a way to rub in how much better you are to your neighbor. But they want nothing to do with the wizarding world, so in a strange way it made a safer place for Harry to grow up. 3. Hand-me-downs. I'm the youngest of seven. I rarely got new things. I would get a small amount of new clothes each year for school, but the majority of my wardrobe, furniture, and even toys had been through most of my brother and sisters before. Again this is something you adjust to. And Harry seemed to do a good job of that. 4. Protection. Imagine a DE looking for a very young Harry, for some revenge. He stumbles upon the Dursleys, but can't even believe that this is the family. They treat Harry badly. This DE is looking for a kid that would probably be treated like a star, but isn't. So they walk away thinking this is a mistake. It's an interesting idea. Ok that's it for my ramblings. --Mari Lea From sroginson at sbcglobal.net Thu Dec 30 14:27:59 2004 From: sroginson at sbcglobal.net (stephen roginson) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 06:27:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] The Veil, HP & LOTR In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041230142759.63512.qmail@web81503.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120753 Silvana: I like to compare the characters JKR develops with Tolkien's LOTR. JKR herself once stated writing her books she was inspired by Tolkien's work. I made up some ideas of who might be who, but I had doubts about who is Aragorn. snip. I'm not sure about: Lupin = Faramir Fudge = Theoden What do you think??? Sorry if it is too weird. SR: I liked your comparisons. The one that struck a chord with me is Fudge. I'm going to compare his role in the plot to that of Lord Denethor. A figurehead, blinded by his own power and desire to retain it. I guess that would leave me comparing Arthur Weasley to Theoden - leaders of large, 'country folk' families ;) We know that Fudge is going to fall, but I'd like to see Arthur Weasley stick it out until the end. SR From stevejjen at earthlink.net Thu Dec 30 14:54:36 2004 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 14:54:36 -0000 Subject: James' Two-Way Mirror after GH (Did Snape Try to Warn James at GH? ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120754 > Snow: > As for Sirius knowing or being allowed to > > remember the whereabouts of GH after changing secret keeper status, > > wouldn't that debunk the meaning "changing" secret keeper? Sirius > had his own way of contacting James if need be and that was the old > two-way-mirrors. Jen: That's an interesting thought. How did Sirius get that second two-way mirror back? Like you said, he and James were probably keeping tabs that way and it should have been destroyed at GH like everything else. It's not indestructible, because we saw Harry's mirror break. Of course, this is one of those questions JKR would probably answer something like this: "Sirius nicked it out of the rubble at GH after it miraculously survived the explosion." :) One of the many, many details in the series that can be answered, but wasn't done so in the actual books. Jen From esmereldah at yahoo.com Thu Dec 30 10:41:16 2004 From: esmereldah at yahoo.com (Lucy Wooten) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 02:41:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] JKR's Messages (was Re: Hermione In Trouble?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041230104116.9492.qmail@web52210.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120755 > Alla: > What I am not sure if I am OK with or not is that > Hermione did not WARN the group what is going to happen to someone > who will betray them. Hickengruendler: I think there are two reasons why Hermione did not tell anybody: 1.) She wanted to see which DA members were truly loyal. 2.) The loyal DA members might have felt offended, if they knew about the hex, and the group might not have become as close as they did. Esmereldah: Also, somebody might have tried to break the hex. Granted, that might be beyond the power of the average Hogwarts student, but if someone had been determined to do so, they most likely would have been able to find out how. esmereldah --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From gbannister10 at aol.com Thu Dec 30 14:59:12 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 14:59:12 -0000 Subject: Crazy idea on why Harry's book 6 stay will be the shortest In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120756 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Silvana Roven" wrote: > > Brent: > > ... > > I think in HBP he might need a good thing to happen to make up for > > the crappy end of the last term. What if JKR has Harry get drafted > > to one of the Pro Quidditch teams like the Chudley Cannons or > > Puddlemere United. These have been mentioned in the books. Everyone > > in the books is always saying how good he is and Quidditch is a theme > > that keeps coming up. This would allow for the meeting of some new > > foreign wizards and maybe the introduction of the Half blood prince. > > > > Silvana: > Harry has been banished from Quidditch for lifetime by Umbridge. > Has this ban been canceled already??? I can't remember reading > about it anywhere. All I can recall is Ron (?) hoping the ban > would be null and void after Umbridge left. Geoff: I've always believed that to be a bit of hyperbole on Umbridge's part. She can obviously make life very difficult for Harry at Hogwarts but I cannot see how she could impose a life time ban outside the school. I would think that the school ban will have been revoked by the next school year; I tihkn Minerva would be pushing for that :-) Re the original message. Harry couldn't be a professional Quidditch player - he would still be a student at school and wouldn't be able to meet the demands of both positions, even if it were allowed. From stevejjen at earthlink.net Thu Dec 30 15:29:17 2004 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 15:29:17 -0000 Subject: Voldemort's Plan in Book 6 Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120757 Re-reading OOTP at the moment and thinking ahead to Voldemort's strategy for Book 6. He'll have to give up on the prophecy now, unless his next move is to kidnap Dumbledore and his Pensieve, or discover a way to make Trelawney remember the prophecy she has no recall of making. He could try to delve into Harry's mind for the information, but I'm betting he leaves Harry alone for awhile after discovering he's full of loving/couragous/heart-felt feelings or whatever force drove him out in OOTP. So, what's next? Voldemort sent an envoy to the Giants, but personally that stategy sounds like a waste of time for this war. There are so few left, so far away, and their loyalty lasts only as long as the gifts keep coming in and/or a new leader doesn't stage a coup. The Dementors offer more possibilties. If Draco is right, and he seems to have accurate information most of the time, then the Dementors have left Ministry control to go to Voldemort. Dumbledore told Fudge "Voldemort can offer them much more scope for their powers and pleasures than you can!" (GOF, chap. 36, p. 707, US). What exactly does Voldemort have to offer the Dementors? Here's where my mind starts wandering over all sorts of gruesome possibilities, and the most probable option is Muggles. There are lots of them, they can't see to escape the Dementors or use the Patronus, and look how quickly the Dementor went straight for a Kiss with Dudley. Riddle had no regard for the Muggle world after his stay in an orphange and the murder of his father, and Voldemort has even fewer sympathies. JKR said there will be enough chaos in the WW in Book 6 that even the Muggles will notice. And what better way to draw Dumbledore and the Order out of hiding than to start attacking defenseless Muggles? Dumbledore has already noted that the 'flaw' in his plan with Harry *and* his Plan with the Order, is to act like a person who 'loves' i.e. has compassion for his fellow beings and creatures. Voldemort's agenda is sketchy at best, but presumably he wants to take over the WW, and then the entire world. World domination is a little mundane, yet remains popular among the evil overlord set. Since the WW is on alert to his presence and more aware than last war, LV will start with disappearances among Muggles, certainly enough to get Dumbledore's attention and to stoke Harry's hero complex. Dumbledore exhorted Fudge to remove the Dementors from guarding Azkaban in GOF. I wondered about that. Now I realize he wants them removed so Voldemort cannot take over Azkaban with the Dementors in place. If he does, or if he already has, LV has the perfect location to either start exterminating the Muggle race or to at least feed the Dementors. Yuck. Parents of Muggleborn Hogwarts students, or the students themselves home for the summer, might be the first targets. Or the Dursley's. Harry was willing to save Dudley from the Dementors no matter what price he paid, so would certainly rush to the aid of Petunia and Dudley (and Vernon?) if they were being tortured at #4 or taken to Azkaban. Or maybe LV is tired of luring Harry out and will focus on amassing the troops. One thing for sure, the stealth is over. The ranks of the DE's will swell with supporters and surprising defections from the good side. Former DE's will be on the list for revenge. The Order might even find they have to move their headquarters to Hogwarts as it becomes one of the last safe bastions in the WW. Jen From mcdee1980 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 30 15:46:07 2004 From: mcdee1980 at yahoo.com (mcdee1980) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 15:46:07 -0000 Subject: JKR's Messages (was Re: Hermione In Trouble?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120758 > > Pippin: > > I think what JKR is > > saying is that the battle against the Riddles and their followers > > can never be won completely, because the only way to keep > > them from exploiting the rights and freedoms the rest of us enjoy > > is to deny them to everybody, and if we do that, they've won. > > SSSusan: > That's what I'm trying to gather: > whether the "consequences" -- punishments, comeuppances, whatever > one calls them -- are being shown as JUST, as RIGHT by the author; > that is, that she *agrees* with them. Lady McBeth now: It seems to me that the "escape from DJU" was in all cases necessary. Hermione may have gone a little over the top in her need to save her friends, but its a clear case of removing the authority when they are not serving the needs of those in their charge. "When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bonds which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation."(TJ) Now in this case the appeal to a higher power and the ability to declare their causes is restricted because the MOM is behind DJU. Hermione merely revolts against an authority that is tyrannical! Revolutions tend to be bloody, so considering that, Umbridge got off easy . . . her head is still attached to her body! From spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com Thu Dec 30 15:51:41 2004 From: spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com (dungrollin) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 15:51:41 -0000 Subject: Hexing the parchment (Was JKR's Messages) In-Reply-To: <20041230104116.9492.qmail@web52210.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120759 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Lucy Wooten wrote: > > > > > Alla: > > > > What I am not sure if I am OK with or not is that > > Hermione did not WARN the group what is going to happen to someone > > who will betray them. > > Hickengruendler: > > I think there are two reasons why Hermione did not tell anybody: > > 1.) She wanted to see which DA members were truly loyal. > > 2.) The loyal DA members might have felt offended, if they knew about > the hex, and the group might not have become as close as they did. > Dungrollin: It's a strange way to police a secret - surely the most important thing was that the secret stayed secret. Punishing someone for ratting once the secret was out and Umbridge knew was silly - you want something to stop them ratting in the first place. It smacks of childish vindictiveness (even if that's not how Hermione intended it). Hexing the parchment wasn't really necessary for plot reasons in the context of OotP, JKR could relatively easily have written the scene in DD's office without having Marietta disfigured - it wouldn't have been that hard. Was it that Harry needed a good reason to get rid of Cho, and Cho complaining about Hermione was as good a way of alienating Harry as any? Well, that could easily have been done the other way around, with Harry having a fit of temper and saying something nasty about Marietta, thus alienating Cho. More interestingly, it could be that Hermione's logic had to fail her for once for plot reasons. Perhaps somebody needs a grudge against Hermione for book 6. It's one of those situations where both sides think they're absolutely right: Marietta says "If you'd warned me that I'd end up horribly disfigured, I would never have joined in the first place, and you'd never have been betrayed." Hermione replies: "You ratted on us! You deserve everything you got!" Ample scope for the beginning of a long-lasting enmity. And if Hermione comes top in everything (except DADA, presumably), and is one of the best friends of the back-in-the-limelight boy who lived, she could become rather unpopular. Particularly if Marietta was one of Krum's fans. Another betrayal in HBP? Well, it's unlikely that the trio are going to trust Marietta again, but the situation has changed somewhat because everyone now knows that Voldy's back. There could be a 'lets all pull together' attitude, with a nice bit of back-stabbing at a crucial moment. Dungrollin. From foxmoth at qnet.com Thu Dec 30 16:10:33 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 16:10:33 -0000 Subject: Marietta and Hermione (was JKR's Messages ) (was Re: Hermione In Trouble?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120760 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "eggplant9998" wrote: > > "pippin_999" wrote: > > > I think Hermione was as wrong to punish > > Marietta the way she did as Umbridge > > was to use the quill on Harry > > So, you think a breakout in acne is too severe a punishment for a piece of scum like Marietta. Let me ask you something Pippin: During World War 2 what do you think would have happened to a member of the French Resistance who was caught betraying her comrades to the Nazis? Do you think she'd get acne or a bullet in the brain? > This is no longer kid stuff, this is serious business,<> Pippin: Joining the Death Eaters is a serious business too, did that make it okay for Voldemort to have Regulus murdered? Of course not, because Regulus didn't know what he was getting in to. Defying a ministry official is a serious business, did that make it okay for Umbridge to use the quill? Of course not, she was violating the policy that corporal punishments should not be used against students. If Hermione thought that traitors to the group should be punished with something more than ostracism, the accepted punishment for betraying student secrets, she should have discussed that with the group. Of course someone might have refused to sign the parchment and gone straight to Umbridge, but in fact, there was an eavesdropper who went straight to Umbridge anyway, so Hermione didn't gain anything by her secrecy. Hermione's hex didn't even keep Marietta from further betrayals -- it took Kingsley's memory charm to do that. All Hermione accomplished with her tyrannical methods was to make an enemy of Cho, a powerful and influential young witch who might have been a useful ally. I expect Hermione might be sorry for that one day. The lesson, IMO, is that tyranny does not pay, even if the tyrant has good intentions. It's a case of choosing the easy path over the right one--tyranny is a more efficient way of making rules, but as Umbridge demonstrated and Hermione found out, it's not a more efficient way of enforcing them. Eggplant: > Pippin, you also seem to think Hermione was wrong to trick Umbridge and let her be kidnapped by the unicorns;< Pippin: No, I think Hermione was wrong to use the centaurs' xenophobia as a weapon. As she found out, there's no controlling it. Pippin From foxmoth at qnet.com Thu Dec 30 16:24:14 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 16:24:14 -0000 Subject: JKR's Messages (was Re: Hermione In Trouble?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120761 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > Alla: > > Hi, Susan! I think we are talking about some kind of "carmic payback" > again. > > I think (and it is only my opinion) that JKR IS quite good at those, but I don't think this situation was "carmic payback", because Harry did not even think that he somehow DESERVED what he got. He did not have a single thought (unless I don't remember this part in canon, of course) that he was humiliated BECAUSE of past event. < Pippin: I don't have my books with me to check, but wasn't Harry sure, at the end of the chapter where he threw the firework, that Snape knew he had thrown it and was going to do something nasty to him in consequence? And that it proved to be quite as nasty as Harry feared? Certainly Harry hasn't deliberately disrupted Snape's class again. About Umbridge: Harry didn't *choose* to defy her by breaking the rules against shouting at teachers and speaking out of turn. He lost his temper and couldn't help himself. Some punishment was appropriate, IMO, both to teach Harry to control his temper and to uphold the right of all the teachers to maintain order in their classes. The quill was bang out of order, though. Pippin From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 30 16:33:41 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 16:33:41 -0000 Subject: JKR's Messages (was Re: Hermione In Trouble?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120762 Pippin: About Umbridge: Harry didn't *choose* to defy her by breaking the rules against shouting at teachers and speaking out of turn. He lost his temper and couldn't help himself. Some punishment was appropriate, IMO, both to teach Harry to control his temper and to uphold the right of all the teachers to maintain order in their classes. The quill was bang out of order, though. Alla: Oh, I see what you mean, but no, I don't agree. I don't believe that that Umbridge had ANY good faith "teacher like intentions" towards Harry in the first place, therefore I don't believe that she has a right to teach ANYTHING to him or PUNISH him. If you are saying that she is due respect only because she calls herself a teacher, I have to strongly disagree on this one. As far as I am concerned, any defiance of Umbridge is a good thing. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 30 16:42:20 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 16:42:20 -0000 Subject: Marietta and Hermione (was JKR's Messages ) (was Re: Hermione In Trouble?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120763 Pippin: If Hermione thought that traitors to the group should be punished with something more than ostracism, the accepted punishment for betraying student secrets, she should have discussed that with the group. Of course someone might have refused to sign the parchment and gone straight to Umbridge, but in fact, there was an eavesdropper who went straight to Umbridge anyway, so Hermione didn't gain anything by her secrecy. Hermione's hex didn't even keep Marietta from further betrayals -- it took Kingsley's memory charm to do that. Alla: Yes, she probably should have discussed it with the group, although I find the objections to that to be well noted. As to whether Hermione's hex accomplished something or not - you never know - I bet if anybody wants to do something similar in the future, they will think twice before doing it. I agree though that it did not accomplish anything in the present. Pippin: All Hermione accomplished with her tyrannical methods was to make an enemy of Cho, a powerful and influential young witch who might have been a useful ally. I expect Hermione might be sorry for that one day. Alla: I think hermione made herself to be Chos' enemy MUCH earlier than that - simply because she was Harry's friend and yeah, I think that may play out in the future. Pippin: The lesson, IMO, is that tyranny does not pay, even if the tyrant has good intentions. It's a case of choosing the easy path over the right one--tyranny is a more efficient way of making rules, but as Umbridge demonstrated and Hermione found out, it's not a more efficient way of enforcing them. Alla: Isn't that a bit ... harsh? Hermione was protecting lives of MANY against possible betrayal of one. She could have done it better, but I cannot fault her much for that or call her a tyrant. Just my opinion. Alla From greatelderone at yahoo.com Thu Dec 30 17:05:47 2004 From: greatelderone at yahoo.com (greatelderone) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 17:05:47 -0000 Subject: The Veil, HP & LOTR [was: Re: The Veil in the Chamber of Secrets?] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120764 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, aUser wrote: > Silvana: > I like to compare the characters JKR develops with Tolkien's LOTR. JKR > herself once stated writing her books she was inspired by Tolkien's work. > > I made up some ideas of who might be who, but I had doubts about who is > Aragorn. > I admit that I thought of Ron because of the Quidditch- jingle "Weasley is > our king". But it didn't fit that good - Ron seems more to be Sam. Agreed Ron does fit the Sam analogue quite well. As for the Aragorn analogue, it's Harry of course. Both are beings chosen by prophecy(Harry by Trelawney and Voldemort while Malbeth predicted that Aragorn as Heir of Isildur would walk the paths of the dead) who have been raised in obscurity from their heritage (Aragorn was raised in Rivendell and not told of his true heritage and Harry by the Dursleys) with their mothers playing a major role in their lives(Lily for Harry and Gilraen for Aragorn). Aragorn is given Anduril the reforged Narsil and Harry wields ever briefly the sword of Godric Gryffindor with Aragorn being the heir of Isildur while Harry as many of speculated is the Heir of Gryffindor to Tom's Heir of Slytherin. Finally both are of mixed blood, Aragorn himself has a bit of elven blood due to the fact that he is descended from Elros of Numenor while Harry is a mixture of both muggle born and purebloods and is thus a half blood. > Reading your suggestion about Slytherin himself falling through the Veil, I > came up with another idea: > How about Sirius being Aragorn? GEO: Sirius is more of a Boromir analogue since both the first men to fall in their respective stories and are both portrayed as somewhat rash. He has little resemblance with Aragorn besides the fact that the movie characters look alike. > Which location might be Minas Tirith the White City? I don't think it's > Hogwarts... Maybe it could be No. 12 Grimmauld Place... IF Siruis is Aragorn > this would be the place he heirs... GEO: I think the MoM is the closest analogue we have to Minas Tirith. > Peter Pettigrew (Wormtail) = Wormtongue GEO: Peter Pettigrew is NOT an analogue for wormtongue. He more closely resembles Gollum, contemptible creatures under the Enemy that in the end will play an important part in good's triumph over evil. > Dumbledore = Gandalf > Fred & George Weasley = Merry & Pippin > Lucius Malfoy = Saruman > Rubeus Hagrid = Treebeard GEO: How about Radagast the Brown. I always thought that Hagrid was more like him than Treebeard. > I'm not sure about: > Lupin = Faramir GEO: I agree especially given how close Lupin and Sirius are. > Fudge = Theoden GEO: Fudge is definitely not Theoden. Fudge consciously refused to believe in Voldemort's return and tried to discredit anyone that said otherwise. Theoden was just an old man being misled by Wormtongue. > I still wonder about who might be comparable to: > Hermione Granger GEO: Eowyn, niece of Theoden, only due to the fact that Eowyn is the only major female character in LOTR that gets her hands dirty. From greatelderone at yahoo.com Thu Dec 30 17:07:44 2004 From: greatelderone at yahoo.com (greatelderone) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 17:07:44 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore as Order Founder (The Order an ancient society) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120765 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > Vmonte responds: > By the way, what do you think is the significance > of Dumbledore's patronus being a Phoenix? > > > Alla: > > I do think that it may support the speculation that this is not > Dumbledore's first reincarnation on Earth, besides that - not sure. GEO: Interesting enough I had the same idea of Dumbledore reincarnating himself into new bodies whenever he dies especially since reincarnation wouldn't have the same problems as just extending your life perpetually like what Flamel did or what Voldemort planned to do. From greatelderone at yahoo.com Thu Dec 30 17:23:15 2004 From: greatelderone at yahoo.com (greatelderone) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 17:23:15 -0000 Subject: Voldemort's Plan in Book 6 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120766 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jen Reese" wrote: > > Re-reading OOTP at the moment and thinking ahead to Voldemort's > strategy for Book 6. He'll have to give up on the prophecy now, > unless his next move is to kidnap Dumbledore and his Pensieve, or > discover a way to make Trelawney remember the prophecy she has no > recall of making. He could try to delve into Harry's mind for the > information, but I'm betting he leaves Harry alone for awhile after > discovering he's full of loving/couragous/heart-felt feelings or > whatever force drove him out in OOTP. > > So, what's next? Voldemort sent an envoy to the Giants, but > personally that stategy sounds like a waste of time for this war. > There are so few left, so far away, GEO: That can be compensated by such things as portkeys. Transportation doesn't seem to be a major factor with magic. and their loyalty lasts only as > long as the gifts keep coming in and/or a new leader doesn't stage a > coup. GEO: Yes, but the present leader has more of a cruel side so Voldemort can use that to his advantage aside from that I'm willing to bet that the imperius curse really works well on giants. > The Dementors offer more possibilties. If Draco is right, and he > seems to have accurate information most of the time, then the > Dementors have left Ministry control to go to Voldemort. Dumbledore > told Fudge "Voldemort can offer them much more scope for their > powers and pleasures than you can!" (GOF, chap. 36, p. 707, US). > What exactly does Voldemort have to offer the Dementors? GEO: No doubt their own choice of people to soul suck and feed off of. > Voldemort's agenda is sketchy at best, but presumably he wants to > take over the WW, and then the entire world. World domination is a > little mundane, yet remains popular among the evil overlord set. > Since the WW is on alert to his presence and more aware than last > war, LV will start with disappearances among Muggles, certainly > enough to get Dumbledore's attention and to stoke Harry's hero > complex. GEO: Why would he do that? Right now Voldemort needs to build up his power base before challenging his opponents especially since he lost so many of his servants in OOTP. > Dumbledore exhorted Fudge to remove the Dementors from guarding > Azkaban in GOF. I wondered about that. Now I realize he wants them > removed so Voldemort cannot take over Azkaban with the Dementors in > place. If he does, or if he already has, LV has the perfect location > to either start exterminating the Muggle race or to at least feed > the Dementors. Yuck. GEO: The dementors already abandoned Azkaban and undoubtly went over to his side. > > Parents of Muggleborn Hogwarts students, or the students themselves > home for the summer, might be the first targets. Or the Dursley's. > Harry was willing to save Dudley from the Dementors no matter what > price he paid, so would certainly rush to the aid of Petunia and > Dudley (and Vernon?) if they were being tortured at #4 or taken to > Azkaban. GEO: Why would he target them first? If he wanted to cause chaos, he'd target the fully grown half-blood and muggleborn wizards. Targeting a bunch of muggleborns and their parents is a waste of time. > Or maybe LV is tired of luring Harry out and will focus on amassing > the troops. One thing for sure, the stealth is over. The ranks of > the DE's will swell with supporters and surprising defections from > the good side. GEO: So far I don't think he has many recruitment opportunities. The only ones supporting him are the pureblood families and most of them are already his DEs and everyone else is just afraid of him. Former DE's will be on the list for revenge. GEO: Former DEs? There are only two, Karkaroff who is the only one on the run and Snape who has wormed himself back into the ranks of the DEs. > The > Order might even find they have to move their headquarters to > Hogwarts as it becomes one of the last safe bastions in the WW. GEO: Agreed, Hogwarts is indeed presently the best place to be the HQ for the OOTP. From gbannister10 at aol.com Thu Dec 30 18:14:17 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 18:14:17 -0000 Subject: The Veil, HP & LOTR [was: Re: The Veil in the Chamber of Secrets?] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120767 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "greatelderone" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, aUser wrote: > > Silvana: > > I like to compare the characters JKR develops with Tolkien's LOTR. > JKR > > herself once stated writing her books she was inspired by > Tolkien's work. > > > > I made up some ideas of who might be who, but I had doubts about > who is > > Aragorn. > > I admit that I thought of Ron because of the Quidditch- > jingle "Weasley is > > our king". But it didn't fit that good - Ron seems more to be Sam. > > Agreed Ron does fit the Sam analogue quite well. > > As for the Aragorn analogue, it's Harry of course. Both are beings > chosen by prophecy(Harry by Trelawney and Voldemort while Malbeth > predicted that Aragorn as Heir of Isildur would walk the paths of > the dead) who have been raised in obscurity from their heritage > (Aragorn was raised in Rivendell and not told of his true heritage > and Harry by the Dursleys) with their mothers playing a major role > in their lives(Lily for Harry and Gilraen for Aragorn). Aragorn is > given Anduril the reforged Narsil and Harry wields ever briefly the > sword of Godric Gryffindor with Aragorn being the heir of Isildur > while Harry as many of speculated is the Heir of Gryffindor to Tom's > Heir of Slytherin. Finally both are of mixed blood, Aragorn himself > has a bit of elven blood due to the fact that he is descended from > Elros of Numenor while Harry is a mixture of both muggle born and > purebloods and is thus a half blood. Geoff: I think there are dangers here in trying to make a direct parallel between characters in HP and in LOTR; it's a bit lke Cinderella's siters trying to make their big feet fit the glass slipper... I can see GEO's argument for Harry=Aragorn from the comparisons made but again, Harry/Ron do compare well with Frodo/Sam. Harry also has to go forward and face perils on his own - the Basilisk for example as Frodo has to face Shelob. Agreed, the outcomes are not arrived at in quite the same way but there are similarities. Silvana: > > Peter Pettigrew (Wormtail) = Wormtongue GEO: > Peter Pettigrew is NOT an analogue for wormtongue. He more > closely resembles Gollum, contemptible creatures under the Enemy > that in the end will play an important part in good's triumph over > evil. Geoff: Now there I would disagree with you. Both Grima and Peter Pettigrew have surrended themselves to an insidious and evil being and have set out to plot the downfall of people around them - Theoden/the Potters. Gollum has becomne the pitiable creature that he is because of the erosion of his will by the Ring; the "two Worms" have each voluntarily allowed themselves to be corrupted by their evil masters. Silvana: > > Fudge = Theoden GEO: Fudge is definitely not Theoden. Fudge consciously refused to > believe in Voldemort's return and tried to discredit anyone that > said otherwise. Theoden was just an old man being misled by > Wormtongue. Geoff: That is too simple an analysis. Theoden may have been older (he was 71 at the battle of the Pelennor Fields) but he was a man of great dignity, power and loved by his people and at the height of his powers t Helms Deep and Minas Tirith. It was the wearing away of his will by Grima through the sorcery of Saruman that brought him so low. Silvana > > I still wonder about who might be comparable to: > > Hermione Granger > > GEO: Eowyn, niece of Theoden, only due to the fact that Eowyn is the > only major female character in LOTR that gets her hands dirty. Geoff: Eowyn came to my mind also immediately, although I think she lacks the pushiness and acerbity of Hermione. I go back though to my first point; we cannot make characters from each book fit the same template. There is no "one size fits all". From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Thu Dec 30 18:26:32 2004 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 18:26:32 -0000 Subject: Hexing the parchment (Was JKR's Messages) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120768 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dungrollin" wrote: > > And if Hermione comes top in everything (except DADA, presumably), > and is one of the best friends of the back-in-the-limelight boy who > lived, she could become rather unpopular. Particularly if Marietta > was one of Krum's fans. Another betrayal in HBP? Well, it's > unlikely that the trio are going to trust Marietta again, but the > situation has changed somewhat because everyone now knows that > Voldy's back. There could be a 'lets all pull together' attitude, > with a nice bit of back-stabbing at a crucial moment. > > Dungrollin. Hickengruendler: A betrayal by Marietta again? I don't think so. IMO, it would be too repetetive and rather unsurprising. Also, IMO, it would in hindsight confirm Hermione's actions, since it would make Marietta seem totally sneaky and untrustworthy. If she would openly confront Hermione, than I could understand it. But becoming a traitor again? The empathy I currently have for her will completely vanquish, if Marietta does this. From kreneeb at hotmail.com Thu Dec 30 18:39:40 2004 From: kreneeb at hotmail.com (Kasey Baker) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 11:39:40 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Crazy idea on why Harry's book 6 stay will be the shortest References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120769 > Silvana: > Harry has been banished from Quidditch for lifetime by Umbridge. > Has this ban been canceled already??? I can't remember reading > about it anywhere. All I can recall is Ron (?) hoping the ban > would be null and void after Umbridge left. Geoff: I've always believed that to be a bit of hyperbole on Umbridge's part. She can obviously make life very difficult for Harry at Hogwarts but I cannot see how she could impose a life time ban outside the school. I would think that the school ban will have been revoked by the next school year; I tihkn Minerva would be pushing for that :-) kitten: Yes I agree, I don't see her having any control over who can play Quiddich... and even on the off chance she did, I'm pretty sure it will be a moot point in book six... I would like to ask, though, while we are "some what" on the subject... What exactly did Umbridge do before she came to hogwarts to teach? I recall her being at Harry's Trial, but I don't recall it ever being mentioned in the book. Re the original message. Harry couldn't be a professional Quidditch player - he would still be a student at school and wouldn't be able to meet the demands of both positions, even if it were allowed. kitten... I don't think Harry will ever be a professional quidditch player, during hogwarts or after... I am reminded though, that School didn't stop Victor from being one. kitten [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From foxmoth at qnet.com Thu Dec 30 18:40:37 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 18:40:37 -0000 Subject: Marietta and Hermione (was JKR's Messages ) (was Re: Hermione In Trouble?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120770 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > Alla: > > Yes, she probably should have discussed it with the group, although I find the objections to that to be well noted. > > As to whether Hermione's hex accomplished something or not - you never know - I bet if anybody wants to do something similar in the future, they will think twice before doing it.< Pippin: There was no need to keep the charm a secret to do that -- quite the opposite! Anyway, deterrence doesn't work against people who have panicked or lost their tempers because they are in no condition to consider the consequences. Hermione's charm couldn't take that into account, and that makes it (IMO) unacceptably ruthless to use against children. > Pippin: > All Hermione accomplished with her tyrannical methods was to make an enemy of Cho, a powerful and influential young witch who might have been a useful ally. I expect Hermione might be sorry for that one day.< > > Alla: > > I think hermione made herself to be Chos' enemy MUCH earlier than that - simply because she was Harry's friend and yeah, I think that may play out in the future.< Pippin: There would have been no reason for Cho and Hermione to continue to dislike each other once Cho was no longer interested in Harry, and that would have happened sooner or later, anyway. > Pippin: > > The lesson, IMO, is that tyranny does not pay, even if the tyrant has good intentions. It's a case of choosing the easy path over the right one--tyranny is a more efficient way of making rules, but as Umbridge demonstrated and Hermione found out, it's not a more efficient way of enforcing them. < > > > Alla: > > Isn't that a bit ... harsh? Hermione was protecting lives of MANY against possible betrayal of one. She could have done it better, but I cannot fault her much for that or call her a tyrant.< Pippin: The question is, I guess, whether you feel Hermione is so innately good that her incipient tyranny needn't be nipped in the bud-- she will never go too far. It doesn't seem to me that the Potterverse works like that -- people who aren't stopped from being bullies or tyrants go on to make a habit of it. As far as Harry's defiance of Umbridge (combining responses here) martyrdom may be a noble action, but it ought to be the last resort, not the first. Pippin From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 30 18:44:00 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 18:44:00 -0000 Subject: The Veil, HP & LOTR [was: Re: The Veil in the Chamber of Secrets?] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120771 Geoff: huge snip of the excellent post with whom I absolutely agree. I go back though to my first point; we cannot make characters from each book fit the same template. There is no "one size fits all". Alla: I agree. Being inspired by the great work, does not necessarily mean that we will be able analogise each character to those in another book. Now,finding some similarities is a different story of course. :o) What I want to know is whether Boromir (who is my probably my favourite character in LOTR) will have similarities with Snape or not. :o) Alla From slgazit at sbcglobal.net Thu Dec 30 18:47:37 2004 From: slgazit at sbcglobal.net (slgazit) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 18:47:37 -0000 Subject: Crazy idea on why Harry's book 6 stay will be the shortest In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120772 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Silvana Roven" wrote: > Harry has been banished from Quidditch for lifetime by Umbridge. > Has this ban been canceled already??? I can't remember reading > about it anywhere. All I can recall is Ron (?) hoping the ban > would be null and void after Umbridge left. Actually it was Ginny who told Harry she'll try out for chaser next year because the ban will not outlast Umbridge. Since all of Umridge's "Educational Decrees" were cancelled, and as I believe Harry's broomstick was returned to him, I don't doubt that the ban is lifted. Banning Harry from Quidditch during book 5 was a usefull literary tool, because it served several purposes: force Ron to shape up since he could not rely on Harry's saving the game for him, show Umbridge's petty cruelty, allow Ginny to enter the team (and not coincidentally defeat Cho Chang in the game, with a highly symbolic romantic sense) and free up Harry's time to focus on the DA and occlumency. I see no reason to continue the ban in book 6 as these reasons don't hold anymore. Salit From Rachel_Maine at baylor.edu Thu Dec 30 17:49:09 2004 From: Rachel_Maine at baylor.edu (raesstienway) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 17:49:09 -0000 Subject: Trelawney really bugs me... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120773 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "vmonte" wrote: > vmonte: > With so much talk about people being in charge of their own > destinies and making the "right" choices, why does Dumbledore put so > much faith into this woman's prophecies? Especially, when they can > be read in so many different ways. > > Sometimes I even wonder if someone is using this woman to keep > Dumbledore and Voldemort busy/preoccupied while they make their own > plans. Could she be someone's puppet? (Could Lucius and Snape be > making their own plans?) I think this mention of Trelawney being a possible pawn is interesting. However, has she always been as crazy as she acts now? I always wondered if Voldemort had done something to her, although there is no great indication of this in the HP books. Also why did Dumbeldore hire her? He has a pattern of taking in those who are unaccepted by the wizarding world, but why Trelawney? What is so odd about her, except for the Divination, which I think is part of the discipline, and her personality. . . Any thought would be welcome. Raesstienway From absolutfrux at yahoo.co.uk Thu Dec 30 18:00:20 2004 From: absolutfrux at yahoo.co.uk (absolutfrux) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 18:00:20 -0000 Subject: Patronus-Animagus / JKR's 2 questions (theory) / Snape Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120774 JKR said once (can't remember exactly where she said it, but) that you can't choose your Animagus, that it comes out as a projection of what your personality is most affiliated with. A naturalistic manifestation of your life essence, then. As far as I can see, one's Patronus seems to work out pretty much the same way. The thing is, we never get to see both the Patronus AND Animagus of any one character. JKR has said that Dumbledore's Patronus is a phoenix, and I can very well imagine that his Animagus would be a similar symbol of life, regeneration and mythic power. Harry's stag, Hermione's otter, Cho's swan, etc, all seem good projections of their character, and it would seem to follow that their respective Animagi would be similar creatures. The only character we see in animal form who also casts a Patronus is Lupin, and not only do we never get to see clearly what his Patronus is (IIRC), but we also have to keep in mind that his werewolf form is NOT his Animagus. So really, my question is: do one's Animagus and Patronus take the same form? That said, it would be interesting if one's personality best reflected a fish. Being all excited when on the brink of finally achieving one's Animagus and then POOF you're a fish and in five seconds you're dead. Also I'd love to witness the effectiveness of Peter Pettigrew's Patronus. Also I'd like to bring up for discussion a theory I've come up with regarding JKR's 2 questions, the ones she said we ought to be thinking about more. Why didn't Voldemort die? And why didn't Dumbledore try to kill him in the MOM? Obviously it's stated in the books that Voldemort took measures to ensure that he never experienced mortal death; I'm not going to speculate on what those measures might be. I want to explore a possible intention of his. What if one of his measures involved sending his spirit/essence into the one who defeated/killed him? This would operate on several levels to his advantage. 1) If his current body was weak enough to be defeated by another power, what better way to recover than to "possess" his conqueror? At this point his conqueror would be physically and mentally tired by battle, open to psychic attack, and his guard would be down, leaving him vulnerable. As Mr Burns in the Simpsons might say: "Eeeexcellent". By the very fact of Voldemort's defeat, it would follow that the body to be possessed would be stronger than his own, therefore: quick and easy way to overcome defeat and turn it into an even greater coup for Voldemort! 2) If the one who defeated him was working on the side of good (ie fighting against him instead of trying to usurp him), what better way to infiltrate the opposition than to control its strongest warrior? If it was an inside job, quick and effective way to quash any little uprising: mentally and spiritually cannabalise its leader. 3) It would ensure that he would never lack a corporeal body in which to wreak havoc. As we all know, however, this third point backfired massively. When he attacked Harry in his cot, he never imagined that this baby would defeat him, due to Lily's brand of "old magic" protection. His curse rebounded and he WOULD have died, if not for the aforementioned measures he took. I'm trying to fit my theory in here. His essence attempted to possess the "conqueror" (ie Harry), which explains why he left an imprint on the boy, Parseltongue, similar wand affinity, ability to access each others' minds etc. However, Voldemort was counting all along that if he was defeated, it would be at the hands of some big and powerful wizard. How could he send his essence into a baby boy? It would be impossible; the vessel could not WHOLLY contain him, so to speak. Therefore the (very large) remainder of him was left in spirit form and had to be quietly spirited (HA HA!) away. There IS a bit of Voldemort in Harry, but not enough to control him. This would neatly explain Dumbledore's cryptic "but in essence divided" comment just after Nagini took a mouthful out of Arthur Weasley. Dumbledore is starting to understand in greater depth just how exactly Harry is getting visions of Voldemort. Also it would explain Quirrell. I don't entirely expect that when Quirrell encountered the ghostly Voldemort in some deep dark forest, he merely sat down and said O Dark Master I am entirely yours, please take me as your slave and feel free to pop out of the back of my head whenever you fancy it. I think he put up a struggle, and him being a full wizard, and DADA teacher as well, and Voldemort being less than Peeves, would have lost. AHA! Then the measures kicked in happily and enthusiastically and Voldemort entered Quirrell. The extent to which he wished to exercise this possession (ie face in back of head vs voices in mind) was regulated then by Quirrell's performance, I expect. I don't think Dumbledore knows precisely what's going on, but he isn't taking any chances, I should think. This understandably frustrates Voldemort a great deal, which is possibly why he maliciously taunts Dumbledore about not wanting to kill him. He WANTS Dumbledore to try. I've also been trying to fit in an explanation for Dumbledore's imfamous "gleam of triumph", but I'll probably need some more information to sort that out. Hope my theory satisfactorily fulfills both of JKR's questions to some extent, though. In any case I've probably babbled on for long enough, and if anyone'd like to respond to this, I hereby leave the floor open. Please do; I'd love to know what you all think. One last teeny thought on Snape. I would pay dearly to find out what JKR's got in store for Snape. After Snape threatened Quirrell in PS and his interaction with Crouching Moody Hidden Barty in GF, it's hard to see how Voldemort could accept Snape again. Maybe he's a double agent. Or a triple agent. If Snape is indeed a superb Occlumens, do we need to doubt that he's a master at concealing physical manifestations of his inner feelings as well? I wouldn't read too much into his actions, if he can control his mind, he can control his body and words. And maybe there's more than meets the eye to those interactions with Quirrell and fakeMoody than we thought. Maybe that's why JKR feels dismay when hearing about Snape fans, because she knows there's betrayal in the offing. Oh Well, That's All! Suzy, UK. From spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com Thu Dec 30 19:04:22 2004 From: spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com (dungrollin) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 19:04:22 -0000 Subject: Hexing the parchment (Was JKR's Messages) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120775 dungrollin wrote: And if Hermione comes top in everything (except DADA, presumably), and is one of the best friends of the back-in-the-limelight boy who lived, she could become rather unpopular. Particularly if Marietta was one of Krum's fans. Another betrayal in HBP? Well, it's unlikely that the trio are going to trust Marietta again, but the situation has changed somewhat because everyone now knows that Voldy's back. There could be a 'lets all pull together' attitude, with a nice bit of back-stabbing at a crucial moment. > Hickengruendler: > > A betrayal by Marietta again? I don't think so. IMO, it would be too repetetive and rather unsurprising. Also, IMO, it would in hindsight confirm Hermione's actions, since it would make Marietta seem totally sneaky and untrustworthy. If she would openly confront Hermione, than I could understand it. But becoming a traitor again? The empathy I currently have for her will completely vanquish, if Marietta does this. Dungrollin again: I was thinking more along the lines of an inappropriately-timed attempt to get even, rather than an all-out betrayal, which could tip the scales at a vital moment. Marietta's not a bad person, and neither is Hermione. Since everybody now knows that Voldy's back, they're all on the same side - there'll be a new Minister of Magic, and everyone will be working together (apart from the bad 'uns, obviously). But if Marietta nurses a specific grudge against Hermione, and there's an opportunity to get even with her she might take it, jeopardising ... something vital that Hermione will have to do. And I can't see any other plot reason for Hermione's lapse of logic in cursing the parchment to reveal snitches *after* they've snitched. In a book as long as OotP, you don't include unnecessary elements. The only way JKR can get around her editors insisting that she cuts bits out is to tell them that it's important for future books. Dungrollin From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 30 19:32:23 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 19:32:23 -0000 Subject: Hexing the parchment (Was JKR's Messages) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120776 Dungrollin again: I was thinking more along the lines of an inappropriately-timed attempt to get even, rather than an all-out betrayal, which could tip the scales at a vital moment. Marietta's not a bad person, and neither is Hermione. Since everybody now knows that Voldy's back, they're all on the same side - there'll be a new Minister of Magic, and everyone will be working together (apart from the bad 'uns, obviously). But if Marietta nurses a specific grudge against Hermione, and there's an opportunity to get even with her she might take it, jeopardising ... something vital that Hermione will have to do. Alla: We don't really know whether Marietta is a bad person or not,IMO only. It could be that she is just a victim of circumstances trying to be loyal to her mother and her friends, it also could be that she is a Peter Pettigrew in making (the traitor not a spy one :o)). NO, I don't think that she is the one, but IMO, she needed to be punished for her betrayal, just maybe not as harshly as Hermione did But again in this post I am not talking about appropriatness of Hermione's actions. Just my opinion, Alla From gbannister10 at aol.com Thu Dec 30 20:08:20 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 20:08:20 -0000 Subject: Crazy idea on why Harry's book 6 stay will be the shortest In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120777 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kasey Baker" wrote: kitten: Yes I agree, I don't see her having any control over who can play Quiddich... and even on the off chance she did, I'm pretty sure it will be a moot point in book six... I would like to ask, though, while we are "some what" on the subject... What exactly did Umbridge do before she came to hogwarts to teach? I recall her being at Harry's Trial, but I don't recall it ever being mentioned in the book. Geoff: Possibly this bit of canon helps... (Fudge speaking) "Interrogators: Cornelius Oswald Fudge, Minister for Magic; Amelia Susan Bones, Head of the Department of Magical Law Enforcement; Dolores Jane Umbridge, Senior Undersecretary to the Minister; Court Scribe, Percy Ignatius Weasley - " (OOTP "The Hearing" p.127 UK edition) She would appear to be a professional civil servant, one of those faceless wonders who have worked their way up quietly behind the scenes and who remain anonymous when something goes wrong. The first reference to her on the same page is interesting... 'On Fudge's right was another witch but she was sitting so far back on the bench that her face was in shadow.' Symbolic? Geoff http://www.aspectsofexmoor.com Enjoy a virtual visit to the Exmoor National Park and the preserved West Somerset Railway From willsonkmom at msn.com Thu Dec 30 20:09:54 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 20:09:54 -0000 Subject: Remus and Sibyll sitting in a tree ( wasRe: Trelawny really bugs me... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120778 > vmonte: > I know Trelawny has been discussed many times (by me and others) but > I've been rereading the books and this character really annoys me. > With so much talk about people being in charge of their own destinies > and making the "right" choices, why does Dumbledore put so much faith > into this woman's prophecies? Especially, when they can be read in so > many different ways. (The daily horoscope is just as vague-- although > not as grim.) > Regardless, I hope that Harry makes the decision to disregard > Trelawny's words and follow his own destiny. Potioncat: I'm re-reading PoA and something has been nagging at me. I'm not really ready to offer up this idea, but that's never stopped me before. I assume your subject is on purpose...Trelawny really bugs you? Goes with all the bug like descriptions about her in PoA. Her crystal ball is referred to as an orb. And for most of PoA, Lupin's boggart is called an orb. He ran from Trelawney when she wanted to crystal gaze for him... So how about this idea? Lupin's Boggart is a prophecy orb (I don't know why! Maybe he's afraid of Trelawney. Maybe there's a prediction about him that worries him. Maybe someone predicted he'd marry Trelawny) To make the orb amusing, he turns it into a cockroach. That is, he turns the prophecy orb into a bug, into Trelawney. Because he thinks it's funny that she looks like a bug. From greatelderone at yahoo.com Thu Dec 30 20:17:29 2004 From: greatelderone at yahoo.com (greatelderone) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 20:17:29 -0000 Subject: The Veil, HP & LOTR [was: Re: The Veil in the Chamber of Secrets?] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120779 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > Geoff: > Now there I would disagree with you. Both Grima and Peter Pettigrew > have surrended themselves to an insidious and evil being and have set > out to plot the downfall of people around them - Theoden/the Potters. GEO: Grima Wormtongue allied himself to Saurman for the material rewards promised him. Peter if we can believe his story unwillingly sided with Voldemort out of fear and for the protection just as Gollum was unwillingly taken by the Ring however both had a hand in their own corruption though. And both as I mentioned again will/did have a final hand in the victory of the protagonists. Gollum in the end fell with the ring into Oroduin while we know that Wormtail still owes Harry that debt which will no doubt play an important part in the future books. > Geoff: > That is too simple an analysis. Theoden may have been older (he was > 71 at the battle of the Pelennor Fields) but he was a man of great > dignity, power and loved by his people and at the height of his > powers t Helms Deep and Minas Tirith. GEO: Thats not true, he wasn't descendend from the dunedain and thus he was probably already considerably aged compared to them at that age, which was probably how Grima was able to control him so easily. > Geoff: > Eowyn came to my mind also immediately, although I think she lacks > the pushiness and acerbity of Hermione. > > I go back though to my first point; we cannot make characters from > each book fit the same template. There is no "one size fits all". GEO: Agreed, but the comparisons are fun though I don't think they can be used to predict future events. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 30 20:22:03 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 20:22:03 -0000 Subject: Snape at Godrics Hollow In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120780 Snow wrote: > I agree with most everything you had to say to this point but > envisioned a little different scenario: where James was aware that > Snape was Dumbledore's informant about the Potter's being in danger. > Could you just imagine James face when Dumbledore tells him that he > now trusts Snape, no specific details as to why, and reveals the > information that Snape had divulged to him. Continuing, Dumbledore > announces that, under the circumstances, they should hide under the > Fidelius charm and that he should be secret keeper. James would be a > little skeptical about the source of the information coming from a > known death-eater whether Dumbledore trusted him or not. Carol responds: Potioncat has already pointed out that Sirius didn't know that Snape had been a DE. For that reason, I don't think that James did, either, or he would have told Sirius. Moreover, Snape is not a "known Death Eater." We know from the Pensieve that he was charged with being a DE but that the charges were dismissed, not because he claimed to be Imperio'd like the DEs whose names were published in the Daily Prophet and elsewhere (Malfoy, Crabbe, Goyle, Avery, Nott, et al.) but because he was a spy for Dumbledore whose identity as a seemingly still loyal DE could not be released to the general public without jeopardizing his mission and his life. AFWK, the only people besides Snape and a handful of DEs who know that Snape was a DE are those who attended Karkaroff's hearing, and they appear to have been silenced in some way. Clearly his DE past is not public knowledge or three-quarters of the parents at Hogwarts would protest. (The Slytherins, in contrast, presumably think he's still a loyal and active DE--or did, up until the end of OoP. JKR only knows what they think now that Lucius Malfoy and company have been arrested.) Carol, who is very curious about Snape's activities between OoP and HBP and wonders if we'll somehow find out about them From ibotsjfvxfst at yahoo.co.uk Thu Dec 30 20:30:05 2004 From: ibotsjfvxfst at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?Hans=20Andr=E9a?=) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 20:30:05 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Character Discussion: Harry (2) Message-ID: <20041230203005.48620.qmail@web25102.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120781 When Harry, the new immortal soul, is born in the heart of the seeker for the ineffable indefinable causeless cause, a new life-force enters his blood stream. This life-force does not originate from this universe, but emanates from the spark of the original creative spirit, symbolised in Harry Potter by Lily. The Lily in our heart was conceived by the Mind of the Architect of the original universe in all its glory, fathomless depth, and rapturous, indestructible beauty. The Architect put himself into that mental spark, and so it's just like him: perfect in every possible way. Hence the glow that comes out of the spark when it's rekindled also has those qualities. However the human being whose blood stream it enters is not perfect, and two irreconcilable forces meet - the life-force of the perfect universe (in a weakened vibration) and the life force of the mortal human being with all his faults, his goodness, and his ignorance. When they meet, this causes a storm in the human being. A person in whom Harry is born will wonder what's happening to him or her. Everything is suddenly different. It's almost like the blood is fermenting. Tremendous emotional storms rage through the person. He may try to escape, but whichever way he turns, the force is there. He may even try to escape to a shack on an island off the coast, but to no avail. Then suddenly, in the middle of the storm, he receives an invitation. This is a stage in the seeker's life which is described very graphically in both Harry Potter and "The Alchemical Wedding of Christian Rosycross". You will all be familiar with the events on Harry's eleventh birthday. Here is the same event in "The Alchemical Wedding": "All of a sudden arose so horrible a tempest, that I imagined no other but that through its mighty force, the hill on which my little house was founded would fly into pieces. But inasmuch as this, and the like from the Devil (who had done me many a spite) was no new thing to me, I took courage, and persisted in my meditation, till somebody in an unusual manner touched me on the back; whereupon I was so hugely terrified, that I dared hardly look about me; yet I showed myself as cheerful as (in such occurrences) human frailty would permit. Now the same thing still twitching me several times by the coat, I looked back, and behold it was a fair and glorious lady, whose garments were all sky-coloured, and curiously (like Heaven) bespangled with golden stars; in her right hand she bore a trumpet of beaten gold, on which a Name was engraved which I could well read but am as yet forbidden to reveal. In her left hand she had a great bundle of letters of all languages, which she (as I afterwards understood) was to carry to all countries. She also had large and beautiful wings, full of eyes throughout, with which she could mount aloft, and fly swifter than any eagle. I might perhaps have been able to take further notice of her, but because she stayed so little time with me, and terror and amazement still possessed me, I had to be content. For as soon as I turned about, she turned her letters over and over, and at length drew out a small one, which with great reverence she laid down upon the table, and without giving one word, departed from me. But in her mounting upward, she gave so mighty a blast on her gallant trumpet, that the whole hill echoed from it, and for a full quarter of an hour after, I could hardly hear my own words. In so unlooked for an adventure I was at a loss, how either to advise or to assist my poor self, and therefore fell upon my knees and besought my Creator to permit nothing contrary to my eternal happiness to befall me. Whereupon with fear and trembling, I went to the letter, which was now so heavy, that had it been mere gold it could hardly have been so weighty. Now as I was diligently viewing it, I found a little seal, on which a curious cross with this inscription, IN HOC SIGNO VINCES, was engraved. ["In this sign will you conquer" - HR] Now as soon as I espied this sign I was the more comforted, as not being ignorant that such a seal was little acceptable, and much less useful, to the Devil. Whereupon I tenderly opened the letter, and within it, in an azure field, in golden letters, found the following verses written. This day, today Is the Royal Wedding day. For this thou wast born And chosen of God for joy Thou mayest go to the mountain Whereon three temples stand, And see there this affair. Keep watch Inspect thyself And shouldst thou not bathe thoroughly The Wedding may work thy bane. Bane comes to him who faileth here Let him beware who is too light. Below was written : Sponsus and Sponsa." [Bridegroom and Bride - HR] At this stage let me just reiterate the obvious: neither Christian Rosycross nor Harry Potter are or were real people, or meant to portray real people. They are personifications. Harry personifies the new soul in a seeker whose heart is open. Christian Rosycross personifies the seeker himself. Hence the invitation is not a physical invitation. It's an invitation written in the heart. When the heart of a seeker is opened; by that I mean when the spark of eternal life begins to catch fire again, it prints a letter as it were on the heart. Paul says, "you are a letter from Christ delivered by us, written not with ink but with the Spirit of the living God, not on tablets of stone but on tablets of human hearts." In other words the power emanating from the pure spirit-spark writes a letter of invitation in the heart. If we can understand the symbolism, we can see that a seeker whose heart is open is a "marked man". This person has a divine spark which has been kindled and so is shining brightly; he longs for liberation and he has drunk the living water. This has caused a storm in his astral body because of the tremendous difference in vibration between the astral force of this universe and that of the original Home. At the same time the power emanating from the Lily in the heart has etched a letter in his heart. This letter invites him to return to the Father's House, but it also gives information. In other words, to cut through the symbolism: the seeker knows what to do. He knows where to go, what he needs on the way, and what the purpose is. Both Harry and Christian Rosycross have to travel through a gate to reach a large castle. Both have to pass a large number of tests, as we know. But I'll bet they both pass! to be continued. ===== 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 ajillity at direcway.com Thu Dec 30 20:01:00 2004 From: ajillity at direcway.com (Jill) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 20:01:00 -0000 Subject: James' Two-Way Mirror after GH (Did Snape Try to Warn James at GH? ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120782 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jen Reese" wrote: > > Jen: That's an interesting thought. How did Sirius get that second > two-way mirror back? Like you said, he and James were probably > keeping tabs that way and it should have been destroyed at GH like > everything else. It's not indestructible, because we saw Harry's > mirror break. > > Of course, this is one of those questions JKR would probably answer > something like this: "Sirius nicked it out of the rubble at GH after > it miraculously survived the explosion." :) One of the many, many > details in the series that can be answered, but wasn't done so in > the actual books. Jill: I am guessing that the situation with James' mirror is similar to that of the invisibility cloak, i.e., "Your father left this in my possession..." I think James distributed these items to those he trusted the most before he went into hiding. (If he's already in hiding, why would he need an invisibility cloak? :))I think James would have given the mirror to Sirius because if he kept it and Sirius' mirror found the wrong hands, it could jeopardize the Potter's safety. From gbannister10 at aol.com Thu Dec 30 21:09:24 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 21:09:24 -0000 Subject: Character Discussion: Harry (2) In-Reply-To: <20041230203005.48620.qmail@web25102.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120783 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Hans Andr?a wrote: As part of message 120719, Hans wrote: > a new soul is born: Harry James Potter. His coming has been > prophesied from the beginning. This prophecy applies to every > seeker whose heart is defeated by the repeated suffering of > thousands of turns of the wheel. > And at his birth a new star shines in the east. and, as part of message 120781, he wrote: > When Harry, the new immortal soul, is born in the > heart of the seeker for the ineffable indefinable > causeless cause, a new life-force enters his blood > stream. > A person in whom Harry is born will > wonder what's happening to him or her. > At this stage let me just reiterate the obvious: > neither Christian Rosycross nor Harry Potter are or > were real people, or meant to portray real people. > They are personifications. Harry personifies the new > soul in a seeker whose heart is open. Christian > Rosycross personifies the seeker himself. Hence the > invitation is not a physical invitation. It's an > invitation written in the heart. Geoff: I do not want to get too deeply involved in a theological discussion as it could lead OT. However, I agree completely with you that Harry is not a real person. But what concerns me is that you are distorting basic Christian teaching to underpin your argument. To become a Christian, we do not have a new soul personified by someone like Harry. Our soul is affected because the Spirit of God challenges us to see the truth of Christ in his resurrection power as God incarnate and, if we accept that challenge, the Spirit enters our lives and we become a changed person. Harry cannot represent that change because he, like us, is weak, changeable, sinful (if I dare use the word) and, even in his better moments, falling short of self-imposed targets. Just like us. Hopefully, we aim for perfection but do not achieve it because of our failings. As I have said before (probably to the point of boredom) is that we can see ourselves in Harry; an everyman on a journey through life. He has high moments - winning his first match at Quidditch, saving Sirius, conjuring his Patronus; the flip side is that he has his low moments - believing that he is responsible for Sirius' death, his anger overtopping his emotions, the debilitating effect of contact with Dementors and so on... He now sees the challenge of needing to defeat Voldemort and is trying to work towards that. We should see the challenge of needing to defeat the evil around and within us and try to work towards that. From elsyee_h at yahoo.com Thu Dec 30 21:11:02 2004 From: elsyee_h at yahoo.com (Tammy) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 21:11:02 -0000 Subject: Crazy idea on why Harry's book 6 stay will be the shortest In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120784 > > Silvana: > > Harry has been banished from Quidditch for lifetime by Umbridge. > > Has this ban been canceled already??? I can't remember reading > > about it anywhere. All I can recall is Ron (?) hoping the ban > > would be null and void after Umbridge left. > > Geoff: > I've always believed that to be a bit of hyperbole on Umbridge's > part. She can obviously make life very difficult for Harry at > Hogwarts but I cannot see how she could impose a life time ban > outside the school. I would think that the school ban will have been > revoked by the next school year; I tihkn Minerva would be pushing for > that :-) > > Re the original message. Harry couldn't be a professional Quidditch > player - he would still be a student at school and wouldn't be able > to meet the demands of both positions, even if it were allowed. Tammy: Ah, but Krum was a professional Quidditch player and a student... so why not Harry too? Though I must say, I don't like the idea of Harry becoming a pro in his 6th year, perhaps 7th. Honestly I'd think he has too much on his plate already, what with being a student and the whole "killing Voldemort and saving the entire WW" thing. Quidditch will just have to wait a year or two. From ohneill_2001 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 30 21:32:04 2004 From: ohneill_2001 at yahoo.com (ohneill_2001) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 21:32:04 -0000 Subject: Crazy idea on why Harry's book 6 stay will be the shortest In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120785 Tammy wrote: > Ah, but Krum was a professional Quidditch player and a student... so > why not Harry too? Though I must say, I don't like the idea of Harry > becoming a pro in his 6th year, perhaps 7th. Honestly I'd think he has > too much on his plate already, what with being a student and the whole > "killing Voldemort and saving the entire WW" thing. Quidditch will > just have to wait a year or two. Now Cory: I was thinking this when I first read that response too, but I'm not sure it's actually true. We know that Krum played on Bulgaria's national team, but did he actually play professionally? It's possible that playing in the Quidditch World Cup might not be as demanding time-wise as playing for one of England's pro teams. Do we know when the professional Quidditch season is? --Cory From eggplant9998 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 30 21:36:30 2004 From: eggplant9998 at yahoo.com (eggplant9998) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 21:36:30 -0000 Subject: Marietta and Hermione (was JKR's Messages ) (was Re: Hermione In Trouble?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120786 pippin_999 wrote:> > Joining the Death Eaters is a serious business too Very true. > did that make it okay for Voldemort to > have Regulus murdered? No. Betraying a good organization is evil, betraying an evil organization is good > If Hermione thought that traitors to > the group should be punished > with something more than ostracism, > the accepted punishmentfor betraying > student secrets, she should have > discussed that with the group Why? Hermione couldn't be certain of the loyalty of nearly half the members of the group. If you planed on keeping your word it won't matter in the slightest if she put a hex on the parchment or not; and if you didn't plan on keeping your word then I just have no tears for you. Did you ever see a cartoon called Dudley Doright,the man who always always always did exactly the "right" thing? It's funny in a cartoon but such a person in real life would be nauseating. If Hermione were to actually act in the way you recommend she would be so sweet, so very very sweet it would be revolting, like the sickly sweet smell of a decaying corpse. > Hermione's hex didn't even keep Marietta from > further betrayals -- it took > Kingsley's memory charm to do that. Nonsense. Without the hex Umbridge would have learned everything while she was still in her office before they even saw Kingsley or Dumbledore or McGonagall or Fudge or Percy or Harry. >It's a case of choosing the easy path over the right one I don't believe in choosing the easy path over the right one, but I do believe in choosing the easy over the hard, and even more so I believe in choosing the path that will work over the one that will not. > I think Hermione was wrong to use the > centaurs' xenophobia as a weapon. So let me get this straight, if you had been in Hermione's shoes you would have done the "moral" thing and Umbridge would have won and Harry would have suffered a horrible death. Hermione did the "immoral" thing and as a result Umbridge lost and Harry lived. If morality causes more pain to more people than immorality then what's the point of being moral? I'm unethical and proud of it, the world would be a better place if more people were unethical. Either that or your ethical ideas are seriously out of whack. Eggplant From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu Dec 30 22:29:28 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 22:29:28 -0000 Subject: Marietta and Hermione (was JKR's Messages ) (was Re: Hermione In Trouble?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120787 Alla: > > Isn't that a bit ... harsh? Hermione was protecting lives of > > MANY against possible betrayal of one. She could have done it > > better, but I cannot fault her much for that or call her a > > tyrant. Pippin: > The question is, I guess, whether you feel Hermione is so > innately good that her incipient tyranny needn't be nipped in the > bud-- she will never go too far. It doesn't seem to me that the > Potterverse works like that -- people who aren't stopped from > being bullies or tyrants go on to make a habit of it. SSSusan: Along with Alla, I don't think of Hermione as a tyrant. But as for nipping her "tyranny" or, as I suppose I prefer to think of it, her "nothing will stop me from doing what I believe to be right" in the bud, I still suspect where she'll learn that lesson is with SPEW and the house elves. Because I haven't seen her as a tyrant, I don't think she needs to be taught a lesson over leading DJU into the forest or for stealing potions ingredients to make Polyjuice, because those really did involve trying to work for right/against evil. But I do think her good intentions are manifesting themselves in misguided actions with SPEW, and I think she's going to learn that in some rather sobering way. Just my two knuts, of course. Siriusly Snapey Susan From foxmoth at qnet.com Thu Dec 30 22:32:55 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 22:32:55 -0000 Subject: Marietta and Hermione (was JKR's Messages ) (was Re: Hermione In Trouble?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120788 Pippin: > > I think Hermione was wrong to use the > > centaurs' xenophobia as a weapon. Eggplant: > So let me get this straight, if you had been in Hermione's shoes you would have done the "moral" thing and Umbridge would have won and Harry would have suffered a horrible death. Hermione did the "immoral" thing and as a result Umbridge lost and Harry lived.< Pippin: Um, the centaurs were going to drag Harry and Hermione off and do whatever they did to Umbridge. If her plan had worked as she intended, Hermione's "morality" would have resulted in three people being driven insane instead of just one. IMO, it was immoral as well as stupid for Hermione to try to unleash a weapon she couldn't control. It would have been far more sensible as well as ethical to lead Umbridge to Grawp in the first place. At least he was her friend. Pippin From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Thu Dec 30 22:42:16 2004 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 22:42:16 -0000 Subject: Marietta and Hermione (was JKR's Messages ) (was Re: Hermione In Trouble?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120789 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > > Pippin: > > > > I think Hermione was wrong to use the > > > centaurs' xenophobia as a weapon. > > Eggplant: > > > So let me get this straight, if you had been in Hermione's > shoes you would have done the "moral" thing and Umbridge > would have won and Harry would have suffered a horrible death. > Hermione did the "immoral" thing and as a result Umbridge > lost and Harry lived.< > > Pippin: > Um, the centaurs were going to drag Harry and Hermione off and > do whatever they did to Umbridge. If her plan had worked as she > intended, Hermione's "morality" would have resulted in three > people being driven insane instead of just one. IMO, it was > immoral as well as stupid for Hermione to try to unleash a > weapon she couldn't control. It would have been far more > sensible as well as ethical to lead Umbridge to Grawp in the > first place. At least he was her friend. > > Pippin Hickengruendler: This might be true, but Hermione didn't have much time to think of a plan. She had to save Harry, and she had to do it quickly. If she had waited a bit longer to make a better plan, than Harry could have joined Neville's parents in St. Mungo's. Besides, the centaurs told her, that they don't hurt foals, therefore Hermione had a reason to believe that she and Harry make it out of the forest unharmed. In the end she made a mistake in telling the centaurs that she used them. Therefore basically it was her honesty/big mouth that brought them into trouble, not the deed itself. And while telling the centaurs the truth probably was very foolish, it wasn't immoral. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 30 22:50:26 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 22:50:26 -0000 Subject: Marietta and Hermione (was JKR's Messages ) (was Re: Hermione In Trouble?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120790 > Hickengruendler: This might be true, but Hermione didn't have much time to think of a plan. She had to save Harry, and she had to do it quickly. If she had waited a bit longer to make a better plan, than Harry could have joined Neville's parents in St. Mungo's. Besides, the centaurs told her, that they don't hurt foals, therefore Hermione had a reason to believe that she and Harry make it out of the forest unharmed. In the end she made a mistake in telling the centaurs that she used them. Therefore basically it was her honesty/big mouth that brought them into trouble, not the deed itself. And while telling the centaurs the >truth probably was very foolish, it wasn't immoral. Alla: You know what, I think you partially convinced me. As I said earlier I found it to be troubled to use somebody's hate as a weapon against somebody else, even if this person is Umbridge, BUT if I am to choose between Harry's insanity and Umbridge's insanity, I will certainly support Hermione's choice. Nevertheless, Hermione is VERY smart young lady as we all know, can we be sure that she chose this plan only as last resort, or as revenge against Umbridge, because I do like leading Umbridge to Grawp instead as Pippin suggested. From khinterberg at yahoo.com Thu Dec 30 22:56:24 2004 From: khinterberg at yahoo.com (khinterberg) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 22:56:24 -0000 Subject: Remus and Sibyll sitting in a tree ( wasRe: Trelawny really bugs me... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120791 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > > Potioncat: > I'm re-reading PoA and something has been nagging at me. I'm not > really ready to offer up this idea, but that's never stopped me > before. > > I assume your subject is on purpose...Trelawny really bugs you? > Goes with all the bug like descriptions about her in PoA. > > Her crystal ball is referred to as an orb. And for most of PoA, > Lupin's boggart is called an orb. He ran from Trelawney when she > wanted to crystal gaze for him... > > So how about this idea? Lupin's Boggart is a prophecy orb (I don't > know why! Maybe he's afraid of Trelawney. Maybe there's a prediction > about him that worries him. Maybe someone predicted he'd marry > Trelawny) To make the orb amusing, he turns it into a cockroach. > That is, he turns the prophecy orb into a bug, into Trelawney. > Because he thinks it's funny that she looks like a bug. This is basically just a "me too" post, sorry about that, but this is simply a wonderful idea, even if it turns out not to be true at all. It is the only explanation I've seen so far that can actually make a bit of sense of Lupin's boggart when he turns it into a cockroach. I do like the idea that his boggart is a prophecy orb, which I know people have said before, but my only possible problem with this would be in the Shrieking Shack when Hermione says she figured out Lupin was a werewolf, and he asked if she did it by figuring out what his boggart was. khinterberg From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Thu Dec 30 23:04:56 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 23:04:56 -0000 Subject: Marietta and Hermione (was JKR's Messages ) (was Re: Hermione In Trouble?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120792 Eggplant wrote: "Betraying a good organization is evil, betraying an evil organization is good" Del replies: How do you know whether an organisation is good or bad when you don't have all the info about it? Regulus apparently didn't think the DEs were such an evil organisation, when he first joined. It's only upon learning more that he changed his opinion of them. And I'm curious to know how a self-proclaimed unethical person like you defines a good organisation vs an evil one? I'm not even sure what meanings the words "good" and "evil" have for you, if you don't have a personal morality? I must admit I'm curious. Eggplant wrote: "Why? Hermione couldn't be certain of the loyalty of nearly half the members of the group. If you planed on keeping your word it won't matter in the slightest if she put a hex on the parchment or not; and if you didn't plan on keeping your word then I just have no tears for you." Del replies: Except that the DA *didn't* give their word. Hermione *made* them sign the parchment, and then added that signing it meant keeping the DA secret. Not a single member of the DA *deliberately* swore to keep the group secret : they were all *tricked* into more or less promising to do so. In my book, a promise someone never really made is not binding. And again I'm wondering : what gives any value to loyalty and keeping promises, for you? For me, it's personal morality that ensures the existence and value of such things. If I had no morality, I wouldn't feel pressured to keep my promises, for example, and I would see little need to be loyal to people or causes. So I'm wondering what those concepts mean to you. Eggplant wrote: "If Hermione were to actually act in the way you recommend she would be so sweet, so very very sweet it would be revolting, like the sickly sweet smell of a decaying corpse. " Del replies: That's your problem if you don't like it. But don't turn what is strictly your opinion and preference into a fact, because it isn't a fact. I personally happen to love very very sweet people. Pippin wrote: "Hermione's hex didn't even keep Marietta from further betrayals -- it took Kingsley's memory charm to do that. " Eggplant answered: "Nonsense. Without the hex Umbridge would have learned everything while she was still in her office before they even saw Kingsley or Dumbledore or McGonagall or Fudge or Percy or Harry. " Del replies: It's not what Marrietta told Umbridge that mattered, it's what Marrietta told Fudge. Even if Marrietta had told the whole truth to Umbridge, it wouldn't have counted anywhere as much without Marrietta's direct witness. And this direct witness is what Kingsley prevented her from giving. Not Hermione's hex. Eggplant wrote: " so I believe in choosing the path that will work over the one that will not." Del replies: Then it's quite simple really : did Hermione's hex prevent Marrietta from ratting on the DA? Nope. Hence it was a useless hex. The *only* thing it did was exposing Marrietta publicly as the traitor, which was quite useless really because I doubt Umbridge would have kept this piece of information secret. If anything, the whole affair could backfire badly : Harry and Hermione could discover that people are not willing to trust Hermione because of her deviousness. Eggplant wrote: "If morality causes more pain to more people than immorality then what's the point of being moral?" Del replies: You're obviously missing the whole point of morality. By definition, morality does not submit itself to numbers, or to brute force, or to anything. Morality exists for its own sake, not for any other point. Eggplant wrote: " I'm unethical and proud of it, the world would be a better place if more people were unethical. Either that or your ethical ideas are seriously out of whack." Del replies: You have the right to be unethical, but you have no right to try and impose your unethicality on anyone else. Just like nobody else has any right to try and impose their own morality on anyone. You can freely state your own opinions as opinions, but I object to you presenting them as facts. And while we're talking about facts : there was NO official war going on in OoP. Marrietta had NO obligation of any kind (including moral) to believe Harry when he said that LV was reborn, she had NO obligation to side with him. And she had NO obligation to keep a word she NEVER freely gave. Even less so if you think ethics are pointless. I must admit I'm really puzzled by you, Eggplant. On one hand you argue that ethics and morality are useless and we should do away with them, but on the other hand you argue that some things some characters did were wrong, for no other apparent reason than that it was immoral to do so. In Marrietta's case, for example, you argue that Hermione shouldn't concern herself with ethics, but you seem to argue that what Marrietta did was wrong strictly for moral reasons (if you gave any other reason, I apologise for missing it). That's quite a paradox, and I'm wondering if you could explain how you resolve it for yourself. Del From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Thu Dec 30 23:11:39 2004 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 23:11:39 -0000 Subject: Marietta and Hermione (was JKR's Messages ) (was Re: Hermione In Trouble?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120793 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > > Alla: > > > Nevertheless, Hermione is VERY smart young lady as we all know, can > we be sure that she chose this plan only as last resort, or as > revenge against Umbridge, because I do like leading Umbridge to Grawp > instead as Pippin suggested. Hickengruendler: I think she chose the centaurs because she thought them to be safer. This is a bit ironic, seeing that Grawp in the end saved them from the centaurs, but like I said, the centaurs told them that they don't harm "foals", while Grawp was uncontrollable (at least the last time Hermione saw him) and could have smashed everybody. And seeing that he really nearly killed her the only time she met him, I could understand if she didn't want to see him again. It's as if Ron would have brought her to Aragog. Therefore she had a good reason to believe that the centaurs were the lesser harm for her and Harry, compared to Grawp. From gbannister10 at aol.com Thu Dec 30 23:11:18 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 23:11:18 -0000 Subject: Crazy idea on why Harry's book 6 stay will be the shortest In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120794 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tammy" wrote: Tammy: > > Ah, but Krum was a professional Quidditch player and a student... so > why not Harry too? Though I must say, I don't like the idea of Harry > becoming a pro in his 6th year, perhaps 7th. Honestly I'd think he has > too much on his plate already, what with being a student and the whole > "killing Voldemort and saving the entire WW" thing. Quidditch will > just have to wait a year or two. Geoff: I doubt whether that would be allowed in the UK real world. In the old Eastern Bloc, things like that happened in Communist days so Krum might have been able to play as a professional as it was only 5 years or so after the Iron Curtain came down. From srae1971 at bellsouth.net Thu Dec 30 23:18:34 2004 From: srae1971 at bellsouth.net (Shannon) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 18:18:34 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Marietta and Hermione (was JKR's Messages ) (was Re: Hermione In Trouble?) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <41D48CCA.9090803@bellsouth.net> No: HPFGUIDX 120795 pippin_999 wrote: > All Hermione accomplished with her tyrannical methods was to > make an enemy of Cho, a powerful and influential young witch > who might have been a useful ally. I expect Hermione might be > sorry for that one day. > I disagree. One very important thing she did accomplish with it was to uncover who wasn't loyal. If Hermione hadn't hexed the parchment, Marietta would have told, they'd all have been expelled at the very least, and they'd never have known who did it. This is important, because every person in that group would be suspect. Considering that this is a group that believed Harry and will probably be important in the fight against Voldemort, that kind of mistrust could be fatal, and the difference between winning or losing the war. If Hermione had hexed it but told them all what would happen if they ratted, all Marietta would have had to do would be to go to someone and say, "Something is going on, and I can't say what because Hermione Granger hexed the parchment we signed." This would eventually surely have led to discovery, and again Marietta would be able to remain anonymous with the same repercussions as above, and also Hermione would probably have gotten into serious trouble, with Umbridge's influence, beyond expulsion. As for Cho, I hope she is too smart to be Hermione's enemy. She may not like Hermione very much, but I think she'll figure out that more is at stake here than her wee crush on Harry and her misplaced indignation on behalf of Marietta. Which is, after all, her only real basis for disliking Hermione. If she can't get over that in the interest of defeating Voldemort, well then she'd probably be more of a liability than an asset, anyway. Shannon From vmonte at yahoo.com Thu Dec 30 23:21:31 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 23:21:31 -0000 Subject: James' Two-Way Mirror after GH (Did Snape Try to Warn James at GH? ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120796 Jill wrote: I am guessing that the situation with James' mirror is similar to that of the invisibility cloak, i.e., "Your father left this in my possession..." I think James distributed these items to those he trusted the most before he went into hiding. (If he's already in hiding, why would he need an invisibility cloak? :))I think James would have given the mirror to Sirius because if he kept it and Sirius' mirror found the wrong hands, it could jeopardize the Potter's safety. vmonte responds: I've seen terminally ill people give away their possessions right before they die. Is it possible that James was "cleaning house" because he knew that he was going to die? vmonte From nrenka at yahoo.com Thu Dec 30 23:34:18 2004 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 23:34:18 -0000 Subject: Remus and Sibyll sitting in a tree ( wasRe: Trelawny really bugs me... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120797 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "khinterberg" wrote: > It is the only explanation I've seen so far that can actually make a > bit of sense of Lupin's boggart when he turns it into a cockroach. > I do like the idea that his boggart is a prophecy orb, which I know > people have said before, but my only possible problem with this > would be in the Shrieking Shack when Hermione says she figured out > Lupin was a werewolf, and he asked if she did it by figuring out > what his boggart was. Yes, that last is a bit of a problem. But I wonder: am I the only person who, when the boggart was revealed, chuckled at Lupin's wit? Think about it: the moon, hanging full in the sky, unreachable, untouchable--it was always a Scavenger Hunt Impossible Item to "permanently alter the face of the moon (no points for blowing it up)". Compared to that, a cockroach--lowly and common, but more importantly, crunchable under foot. WHACK! Lupin sure wishes the moon, which rules his life, were so gratifyingly disposable-of. And that makes the best sense for me, at least. -Nora waves at Pippin from afar and idly but good-naturedly wonders what will happen if ESE!Lupin is completely nuked next book, right before the big get-together From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Thu Dec 30 23:42:52 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 23:42:52 -0000 Subject: JKR's Messages (was Re: Hermione In Trouble?) In-Reply-To: <20041230110858.1628.qmail@web52204.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120798 Esmereldah wrote: "I guess Hermione wanted to remind people of just what Marietta did." Del replies: As far as we know, what Marrietta did might simply have been acting according to her own conscience. I find it very telling indeed that Hermione would want the whole school to see Marrietta getting punished for *that*. The fact is : we don't know *why* Marrietta did what she did. We are not told either that Hermione talked to her, tried to determine what made her act like that. And yet she maintained the hex. Esmeraldah wrote: "The girl fooled Cho Chang and the rest as to her intent for a substantial period of time. The fact that Chang still defends Marietta tells us that Marietta must be very persuasive." Del replies: The way I see it, it's Cho who was very persuasive. Marrietta clearly showed right from the beginning that she didn't want anything to do with the DA. She very obviously came to the first meeting only because Cho made her come. Then, between Cho, the forced promise not to tell, and a possible desire to learn some practical DADA, Marrietta kept coming. But we simply don't know what she told Cho during all that time. If I had to place a bet, I would place it on Marrietta repeatedly trying to get out, and Cho systematically convincing her to keep going (tears didn't work on Harry, but I wouldn't be surprised if they worked on Marrietta). Del From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 30 23:49:09 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 23:49:09 -0000 Subject: (un)masking the DEs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120799 Hannah wrote: Oh, I love discussing this! I still don't believe that > Lucius intended to bring back LV using the diary. The idea that his > intention was to manipulate the young Riddle is a plausible one, but > the thing that bothers me is the timing. Why do it then? I think > Lucius was happy enough to be rid of LV - I don't think he would > enjoy all the subservience. > > To me, the diary was a way of unseating DD, discrediting Arthur > Weasley (and his new Muggle-protection legislation), and possibly > killing off Harry Potter. I don't think Lucius knew the full extent > of its powers or realised that it could bring back a living young! > Voldemort. Carol responds: The question for me (besides how he got hold of the diary and whether he had explored its powers by writing in it himself before giving it to Ginny) is how much he knew about Voldemort's return. IOW, did he know that LV had been inside Quirrell's head the previous school year? Dumbledore tells Harry near the end of SS/PS that "the whole school knows" what happened between him and Quirrell, but *how much* do they know and how accurate is that knowledge? More specifically, what does Draco "know" and what did he report to his father? Surely Lucius's timing has something to do with the previous year's events(?) Certainly by this time Lucius views Harry as a threat, and his silencing Draco in CoS seems to suggest that something more than Harry's status as the infant "hero" who "saved" the WW from LV is involved here. I think Lucius knows that Harry saved the sorceror's stone from Quirrell and that Quirrell was somehow connected with LV. But Lucius could not have had any *direct* contact with either Vapormort or Quirrellmort or that contact would have been revealed later in the graveyard discussion. Did Lucius (in CoS) suspect that LV was trying to come back and decide that he would bring about the return in his own way so that Riddlemort would owe him a debt of gratitude? Surely he had more in mind than disgracing the Weasleys (a nice *side* benefit) and Dobby's behavior suggests that his target was Harry. How could that be unless he knew that Riddle was Voldemort and would discover Harry's identity through the diary and try to kill or control him? And why try to kill Harry if he *didn't* want Voldemort to return in some form? Next time JKR holds a chat, I hope someone asks her what Lucius hoped to accomplish by giving Ginny the diary! Oh, and SSS, I don't think Lucius (graveyard scene) would have brought up a *failed* attempt to restore LV, especially since he got off pretty well compared with Avery. He was only reprimanded rather than Crucio'd. Sometimes silence is golden. Carol, whose fingers keep typing "Lucious" even though she doesn't consider slippery Lucius at all luscious From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 30 23:59:26 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 23:59:26 -0000 Subject: The Veil in the Chamber of Secrets? (was Re: more predictions from Jo) In-Reply-To: <003301c4edc0$c907eca0$8000a8c0@casa> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120800 Fridwulfa wrote: > Life is not really that complicated. Slytherin himself could have taken the Veil with him when he left the Castle. > When he dies (steping accidentally to the other side of the veil while pacing absentmindedly reading the D. P) his heirs/descendants/ascendants and greedy neighbours divide his fortune but no one seems to want the ugly thing, too big to keep in the living room, it doesn't really go with the curtains and the couch... so, of course, they donate it to the Ministry, and there it has been since. Carol responds: I don't think it's the Veil itself but the arched doorway it covers that's the entrance to the Other World. I think the MoM was built on that spot because it was a site where the ancient Druids held their rituals, perhaps including ritual sacrifice. Death would be the first of the Mysteries, and the others would have grown up around it. Eventually the ministry itself would have built its headquarters where the Mysteries were already being explored. Speculation, I know, but notice that the archway seems ancient and seems to have an equally ancient amphiteater built around it. Another possibility is that the doorway was used for public (WW) executions. At any rate, the Veil itself merely covers the entrance and moving it would accomplish nothing--except leaving the entrance to the Other World exposed to mortal eyes. Carol From nrenka at yahoo.com Fri Dec 31 00:16:26 2004 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 00:16:26 -0000 Subject: The Veil in the Chamber of Secrets? (was Re: more predictions from Jo) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120801 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > Carol responds: > I don't think it's the Veil itself but the arched doorway it covers > that's the entrance to the Other World. I think the MoM was built on > that spot because it was a site where the ancient Druids held their > rituals, perhaps including ritual sacrifice. This is an interesting idea, but what I wonder about is: does that work in JKR's cosmology of the Potterverse? She's playing very fast and loose with a lot of things, taking what she wants, so large-scale parallels to any real life system don't work out very well. So I wonder what kind of 'reality', so to say, Druidic systems would have in the Potterverse. IMHO, it never works when fanfic writers or theorists about canon start importing ideas from RL ceremonial magical practice, or Wicca, or much of anything else. Rituals are pretty clearly not a big thing in her created system of magic, either. Put it in the category of 'big metaphysical questions' that are currently unanswered, but I sure hope she's thought out. I'm pretty sure she knows exactly WHY Voldemort didn't die and how Lily's sacrifice worked, so I'll bet on a well-thought out Veil, too. -Nora admits to not being a big fan of Joseph Campbell, either From vmonte at yahoo.com Fri Dec 31 00:20:52 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 00:20:52 -0000 Subject: Patronus-Animagus / JKR's 2 questions (theory) / Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120802 Suzy wrote: 1) If his current body was weak enough to be defeated by another power, what better way to recover than to "possess" his conqueror? At this point his conqueror would be physically and mentally tired by battle, open to psychic attack, and his guard would be down, leaving him vulnerable. As Mr Burns in the Simpsons might say: "Eeeexcellent". By the very fact of Voldemort's defeat, it would follow that the body to be possessed would be stronger than his own, therefore: quick and easy way to overcome defeat and turn it into an even greater coup for Voldemort! vmonte responds: Good post! I often wonder what happened to Salazar. If I run with your idea do you think it's possible that SS found immortality via possession? As you say, this is an easy answer to the immortality problem. If so, I wonder if all the transformations made Salazar forget who he originally was. Is he now something other than human? Kneasy believed that perhaps there was an evil entity that was attaching itself to host bodies. Was Grindelwald one of these host bodies? Was Tom Riddle the next host? Could Tom have been a willing carrier for this soul? (Because I still believe that the host has to be a willing participant. It goes along with Dumbledore's speech: `It's our choices that make us who we are.') Is this entity Salazar, who has survived death via becoming a parasite? Is it possible that when Voldemort attacked baby Harry that this entity and Tom Riddle's soul split apart/severed? Did one of these enter Harry's body and the other remained in the Voldemort host body? It is interesting that the first time we meet Voldemort he is living like a parasite in back of Quirrell's head. I also keep wondering why Harry had deja vu when he found Tom Riddle's diary. In CoS Harry felt like he knew Tom Riddle, as though he was once a childhood friend (I'm paraphrasing a lot). Harry also kept looking at the diary as though he wanted to finish the story that was started. It's all very curious... vmonte From snow15145 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 31 00:44:46 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 00:44:46 -0000 Subject: Snape at Godrics Hollow In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120803 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > Snow wrote: > > I agree with most everything you had to say to this point but > > envisioned a little different scenario: where James was aware that > > Snape was Dumbledore's informant about the Potter's being in danger. > > Could you just imagine James face when Dumbledore tells him that he > > now trusts Snape, no specific details as to why, and reveals the > > information that Snape had divulged to him. Continuing, Dumbledore > > announces that, under the circumstances, they should hide under the > > Fidelius charm and that he should be secret keeper. James would be a > > little skeptical about the source of the information coming from a > > known death-eater whether Dumbledore trusted him or not. > > Carol responds: > Potioncat has already pointed out that Sirius didn't know that Snape > had been a DE. For that reason, I don't think that James did, either, > or he would have told Sirius. > > Moreover, Snape is not a "known Death Eater." We know from the > Pensieve that he was charged with being a DE but that the charges were > dismissed, not because he claimed to be Imperio'd like the DEs whose > names were published in the Daily Prophet and elsewhere (Malfoy, > Crabbe, Goyle, Avery, Nott, et al.) but because he was a spy for > Dumbledore whose identity as a seemingly still loyal DE could not be > released to the general public without jeopardizing his mission and > his life. AFWK, the only people besides Snape and a handful of DEs who > know that Snape was a DE are those who attended Karkaroff's hearing, > and they appear to have been silenced in some way. Clearly his DE past > is not public knowledge or three-quarters of the parents at Hogwarts > would protest. (The Slytherins, in contrast, presumably think he's > still a loyal and active DE--or did, up until the end of OoP. JKR only > knows what they think now that Lucius Malfoy and company have been > arrested.) > > Carol, who is very curious about Snape's activities between OoP and > HBP and wonders if we'll somehow find out about them Snow: You're right, Potioncat, had pointed out a few discrepancies, which I feel can easily be corrected without changing the scenario. Sirius still may have known that the informant was Snape, whom he had suspected, according to GOF pg. 531 of being a Voldy supporter because of the company he kept: "Ever since I found out Snape was teaching here, I've wondered why Dumbledore hired him. Snape's always been fascinated by the Dark Arts, he was famous for it at school. Slimy, oily, greasy-haired kid, he was, [ ] "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." And " Snape was never even accused of being a Death Eater- not that that means much." It isn't really necessary for Sirius to have known that Snape had been a death-eater because he already suspected that much, which would be a very good reason for Sirius to want to change the secret keeper. (In fact, if you suspect an ESE Snape this would have been a beautiful way to target the Potters, know exactly where they are, and ensure the secret keeper would not be Sirius, but someone more likely to be broken. Another post perhaps.) I can't see James being told the information from Dumbledore about Voldemort's threats on his family without being told the source of the information as verification. James had saved Snape's life once so Dumbledore would not have hesitated to trust James with at least the partial information that Snape had come to him with valuable information. It may not have been necessary to divulge the fact that Snape defected from the ranks of Voldemort or that Dumbledore has now entrusted Snape with any position, after all Dumbledore rarely gives more information than is necessary. James would had to have told Sirius why he wanted him to be secret keeper under the Fidelius charm and share the information that Dumbledore told him and where the information came from. I don't think that James or Sirius would be satisfied with receiving information of this magnitude without demanding to know where it came from. James may have been all right with the fact that Snape had supplied them with the info because James might have seen this action as a repayment for the life debt Snape owed him and attempted to sell Sirius this same reasoning for trusting Snape. Sirius and James argue a bit about trusting the information and they compromise with a secret keeper change with Sirius as watch dog to the new secret keeper. Nothing would have gone wrong except Sirius demanded the secret keeper change. Hopefully this revised version helps make the original scenario more palatable. Snow From vmonte at yahoo.com Fri Dec 31 00:54:18 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 00:54:18 -0000 Subject: Remus and Sibyll sitting in a tree ( wasRe: Trelawny really bugs me... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120804 Potioncat wrote: I'm re-reading PoA and something has been nagging at me. I'm not really ready to offer up this idea, but that's never stopped me before. I assume your subject is on purpose...Trelawny really bugs you? Goes with all the bug like descriptions about her in PoA. Her crystal ball is referred to as an orb. And for most of PoA, Lupin's boggart is called an orb. He ran from Trelawney when she wanted to crystal gaze for him... So how about this idea? Lupin's Boggart is a prophecy orb (I don't know why! Maybe he's afraid of Trelawney. Maybe there's a prediction about him that worries him. Maybe someone predicted he'd marry Trelawny) To make the orb amusing, he turns it into a cockroach. That is, he turns the prophecy orb into a bug, into Trelawney. Because he thinks it's funny that she looks like a bug. vmonte responds: Lupin wants to squash Trelawny like a bug, huh? :) I think Lupin may be hiding something, and he's afraid that Trelawny may see it. Not so much that he is ESE LUPIN!, but more like 'I may have killed a friend or Order member while I was a werewolf' kind of thing. Wasn't there someone in Moody's picture who all they found of him was pieces? Was he killed by a DE, or by Lupin? I don't know why I feel like Lupin feels guilty about something. And what are the chances that he's never killed? Just how many full moons are there in a year? Where was he on the night of GH? vmonte From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 31 00:55:16 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 00:55:16 -0000 Subject: JKR's Messages (was Re: Hermione In Trouble?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120805 Pippin wrote: > > I think what she means by innate goodness is that the Trio's sense of right and wrong is maturing on schedule and hasn't been damaged. They are revolted by cruelty, as Draco and Snape are not, and their ability to form attachments to others and their desire to see fair play are intact and broadening. That makes them very different from Tom Riddle. > SSSusan responded: > I certainly wouldn't disagree at all with what you're saying about the trio's emotional and moral development. The question remaining is whether that is or isn't what JKR is referring to when she talks about the trio's "innate goodness." My thought was along the lines of the first part of what you described: that their sense of right & wrong is maturing on schedule and -- I would add -- appropriately, per JKR's definition of appropriately. Carol adds: I don't know about either of you, but I'm bothered by the word "innate," which suggests that their goodness is inborn--a concept very much at odds with the idea of choice. If they're innately good, they can make mistakes (and they do), but they can't become evil. In contrast, Tom Riddle, who unquestionably is or becomes evil, cannot be innately good. Is he evil by his own choice, a choice denied the "innately good" Trio, or is he innately evil, in which case his choices were preordained and not choices at all? If *some* people are innately good, why wouldn't *all* people be? Surely good and evil are meaningful concepts only if those who choose them do so knowingly and willingly? Surely Harry's heroism is meaningful only if he could, through his own deliberate choices (not errors), fall into evil himself? If, for example, he had sustained that Crucio of Bellatrix, willing her to suffer and enjoying her suffering, wouldn't both he and his action be evil? And wouldn't Harry, if he were "innately good," be immune from such temptations? He came, IMO, perilously close to making Tom's choices at that point and may come closer still. But he must *choose* not to take Tom's road, and Tom himself must have *chosen* to take it, or they are both merely puppets, one born to be good and the other born to be evil, neither fully human and neither in charge of his own destiny. Pippin wrote: > > Harry *did* get a punishment. He's quite sure Snape embarrassed him in front of the duelling club for throwing the firework. Ron didn't take part in the theft, IIRC, so it makes sense that nothing much happened to him. > > SSSusan responded: > Yes, Harry's convinced he got *Snape's* punishment. But is that the same thing as JKR's punishment? That's what I'm trying to gather: whether the "consequences" -- punishments, comeuppances, whatever one calls them -- are being shown as JUST, as RIGHT by the author; that is, that she *agrees* with them. *Is* that what we get with Harry being humiliated by Snape -- a clear message to the readership that Harry's getting what he truly deserves? Or is it just "one more instance" of Snape being unfair in Harry's eyes? Carol adds: Without getting into the Snape aspect of this discussion, it seems clear to me that both Harry and Hermione (and probably Ron as well) need a clearer sense that actions have consequences. If you break rules, you're punished; if you ignore people's feelings, they will respond angrily; if you act without thinking, you'll make things worse instead of better. I don't know if that's how JKR sees things--she seems to be a little fonder of "the end justifies the means if you're a Gryffindor" than I would like--but I think and hope that both (or all) of them will learn from their experiences and act more wisely in future books. That's what a bildungsroman is all about--the journey from Innocence through Experience to Wisdom. And I hope that all three of our young protagonists arrive intact at the end of the journey, having learned from their previous mistakes that good intentions don't always have good consequences and that the means is just as important as the end. Well, that's my morality, anyway. I'm not certain that it's JKR's. Carol, who wishes that real-life experience led to wisdom as it does in the Romantic tradition From slgazit at sbcglobal.net Fri Dec 31 01:15:28 2004 From: slgazit at sbcglobal.net (slgazit) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 01:15:28 -0000 Subject: Marietta and Hermione (was JKR's Messages ) (was Re: Hermione In Trouble?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120806 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > You know what, I think you partially convinced me. As I said earlier > I found it to be troubled to use somebody's hate as a weapon against > somebody else, even if this person is Umbridge, BUT if I am to choose > between Harry's insanity and Umbridge's insanity, I will certainly > support Hermione's choice. Agree. I think Hermione had to do some very quick thinking under very stressfull conditions. As such the idea to use the centaurs was good. > Nevertheless, Hermione is VERY smart young lady as we all know, can > we be sure that she chose this plan only as last resort, or as > revenge against Umbridge, because I do like leading Umbridge to Grawp > instead as Pippin suggested. I don't think Hermione wanted revenge against Umbridge. Unlike the case of Rita Skitter, Umbridge never hurt Hermione (she was not punished even if told to shut up). Where Hermione messed up is the same place where she messed up with the House Elves. While extremely intelligent, Hermione lacks the ability to understand and emphasize with the mindset and feelings of creatures who signinificantly differ from her (e.g. part Humans). Her interaction with the Centaurs was what made the situation for them worse. This is where her prejudices towards part humans (including the house elves) hurt her - she tries to use and manipulate them but does not really understand what makes them tick. Salit From chnc1024 at AOL.COM Fri Dec 31 01:45:22 2004 From: chnc1024 at AOL.COM (chnc1024 at AOL.COM) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 20:45:22 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Remus and Sibyll sitting in a tree ( wasRe: Trelawny real... Message-ID: <1e3.31e47151.2f060932@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120807 In a message dated 12/30/2004 3:01:29 PM Pacific Standard Time, khinterberg at yahoo.com writes: > Potioncat: > Her crystal ball is referred to as an orb. And for most of PoA, > Lupin's boggart is called an orb. He ran from Trelawney when she > wanted to crystal gaze for him... > > So how about this idea? Lupin's Boggart is a prophecy orb >Maybe there's a prediction about him that worries him. ********************************************************************** khinterberg wrote: It is the only explanation I've seen so far that can actually make a bit of sense of Lupin's boggart when he turns it into a cockroach. I do like the idea that his boggart is a prophecy orb, *************************************************************** Chancie: Hmm... I never thought about that possibility before. Perhaps if there is a prophecy it may have something to do with Lupin being the HBP, but then again maybe not.. I have always wondered why his boggart is discribed as an orb, personally I would think that more people than just Hermione would notice it was a moon. It's not like they haven't all seen it before. We know boggarts show detail from the descriptions of when others encounter one. So wouldn't others see the moon craters, or other equally defining characteristics? Chancie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From chnc1024 at AOL.COM Fri Dec 31 01:54:07 2004 From: chnc1024 at AOL.COM (chnc1024 at AOL.COM) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 20:54:07 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Crazy idea on why Harry's book 6 stay will be the sho... Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120808 In a message dated 12/30/2004 3:15:45 PM Pacific Standard Time, gbannister10 at aol.com writes: Tammy: Though I must say, I don't like the idea of Harry > becoming a pro in his 6th year, perhaps 7th. Honestly I'd think he has > too much on his plate already, what with being a student and the whole > "killing Voldemort and saving the entire WW" thing. Quidditch will > just have to wait a year or two. ********************************************************************** Chancie: I agree with you Tammy! After all the whole reason Dumbledore didn't pick him as a prefect was because he all ready had so much to deal with. Maybe it's just me, but I think the explanation for Harry's early removal from Privet drive, is pretty simple. The Weasley's already told him they were going to get him away from there as soon as they could. So I assume they are all just making good on their promises. It could also have something to do with the O.W.L.'s they are supposed to come out in July, so maybe they come to get him in order to celebrate. Chancie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From willsonkmom at msn.com Fri Dec 31 02:10:53 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 02:10:53 -0000 Subject: Remus and Sibyll sitting in a tree ( wasRe: Trelawny real... In-Reply-To: <1e3.31e47151.2f060932@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120809 > Chancie: > > Hmm... I never thought about that possibility before. Perhaps if there is a > prophecy > it may have something to do with Lupin being the HBP, but then again maybe > not.. > I have always wondered why his boggart is discribed as an orb, personally I > would > think that more people than just Hermione would notice it was a moon. It's > not > like they haven't all seen it before. We know boggarts show detail from the > descriptions > of when others encounter one. So wouldn't others see the moon craters, or > other equally > defining characteristics? > Potioncat: Someone else came up with the idea, oh, over a year ago, that Lupin's boggart was a prophecy orb, not a moon. The more I argued against prophecy orb, the less convinced I became with the "moon" as boggart. It's Lupin, after all who tells us it's a moon. It's never described as a moon. To me the real puzzle was the cockroach. But as I was reading PoA, I saw how much and how often Trelawney was described in different bug- like ways. To me it would fit that if Lupin's boggart is a prophecy orb, turning it into a parody of Trelawney might banish it for him. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 31 02:19:38 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 02:19:38 -0000 Subject: Trelawny really bugs me... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120810 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tonks" wrote: vmonte wrote: > > I know Trelawny has been discussed many times (by me and others) but I've been rereading the books and this character really annoys me. With so much talk about people being in charge of their own destinies and making the "right" choices, why does Dumbledore put so much faith into this woman's prophecies? > > > Tonks wrote: > DD only puts faith is one of her prophecies. And he can tell the > differece between a true prophecy and a false one. He does not have > a high regard for divination at all. Carol responds: True, he doesn't have a high regard for Divination as a school subject, an art or craft that can be taught to students or be in any way useful to them, but he probably has no choice but to keep it in the curriculum (despite his briefly considering dropping the subject) because his students will need it for their OWLs. More important, his feelings about divination in general (crystal balls and tea leaves) are probably separate from his respect for real Seers like Cassandra Trelawney (or whatever her last name was). The Prophecies are not housed in the Department of Mysteries for nothing. Evidently they have ways of coming true, or all the Seers would have been exposed as hoaxes long before. I think that a real Prophecy, made in a state of trance by a Seer who is only a conduit for some other voice, is somehow true without being a blueprint for the future or an exact record of a preordained future. Certainly it does not in itself shape the future. It is of necessity ambiguous before the future itself is still unshaped, still in the process of "becoming." IOW, the actions that will bring the Prophecy to fulfillment not only have not yet happened, they have not in any way been predetermined. But just as in the Greek myths, those who try to thwart the Prophecies succeed only in bringing them about in some unanticipated way. I think, though, that ignoring a Prophecy or not knowing about it will make no difference. It will come about in some way through the actions of the persons involved whether they know about it or not. What I want to know but don't expect to find out is whose voice is speaking through the Seers. (Obviously not Apollo's; this is the Potterverse, not ancient Greece.) Clearly it's not Voldemort's or he wouldn't be so worried about the exact wording of the Prophecy. I doubt that it's a Death Eater's, either. Lucius Malfoy, the cleverest of the DE's (setting aside the ex-DE, Snape) wouldn't hoave the power to possess a Seer and put her in a trance, nor would he have had access to Trelawney at Hogwarts to cause her to make the second Prophecy (which did, in its way, turn out to be true). Theoretically, Snape could have Imperio'd her at Hogwarts, forcing her to make that Prophecy, but his actions and attitudes in POA make that highly improbable, and it makes nonsense of his whole story--and Harry's--to suppose that he would have done the same thing at the Hog's Head. (Besides, I trust Severus Snape, but that's beside the point.) I think, in any case, that Trelawney's Prophecies are real, and that the purpose of the one in POA was to prepare us for the more important original Prophecy in OoP. And I think that Dumbledore, despite his humorous but affectionate tolerance for Trelawney, knows that her first Prophecy is genuine and that she would be in great danger if Voldemort were to get his hands on her. Granted, he used Voldemort's desire for the Prophecy to delay him from starting VW2, but IMO he also knows that the Prophecy itself is genuine--the prediction that the conflict between LV and Harry will decide the fate of the WW is not lies or fluff but the truth in some as yet indeterminate form--and it grieves him that Harry must now know that truth. To Trelwaney: Others have predicted that she'll make a third Prophecy, probably in HBP, simply because that sort of thing always comes in threes and because it's the sort of motif or plot device that seems likely to turn up again, like polyjuice potions or metamorphmagic or (heaven forfend) time-turning. I for one fully expect to see another real Prophecy from Trelawney--and just possibly, some of her minor predictions (made as her own "normal" self using tea leaves or crystal balls) may come true as well. After all, she saw a black dog in the crystal ball. She merely misinterpreted it as the Grim. Carol From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 31 02:31:36 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 02:31:36 -0000 Subject: Marietta and Hermione (was JKR's Messages ) (was Re: Hermione In Trouble?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120811 Eggplant wrote: "If Hermione were to actually act in the way you recommend she would be so sweet, so very very sweet it would be revolting, like the sickly sweet smell of a decaying corpse. " Del replies: That's your problem if you don't like it. But don't turn what is strictly your opinion and preference into a fact, because it isn't a fact. I personally happen to love very very sweet people. Alla: He! Absolutely, Del. As long as person is sincere in his /her sweetness, I love such people too. You know, when person genuinely loves other people and tries to do the right hing, what is not to like? Anyways, just wanted to agree. :o) Del replies: And while we're talking about facts : there was NO official war going on in OoP. Marrietta had NO obligation of any kind (including moral) to believe Harry when he said that LV was reborn, she had NO obligation to side with him. And she had NO obligation to keep a word she NEVER freely gave. Even less so if you think ethics are pointless. Alla: Well, here I must disagree, especially since I don't think that eithics are pointless. Moreover, as you know I don't believe in absolute relativism of the morals. Such as - if person decides to join LV because of his/her personal morals, I do NOT consider such person to be good one and I don't believe that this is relative, IMO. I believe that war was already there in OOP, even though it was not official yet. Personally, I believe that Marietta had NO business coming to DA int he first place, period. You were talking about Cho being persuasive and I frankly don't remember Cho forcing Marietta to do anything. I mean I remember Marietta not looking very sure in herself, when she came, but besides I think I am turning blank. Could you give me the quote, which supports Cho forcing anything on Marietta, please? If I were to speculate, who knows, maybe Marietta's mother told her to come and spy on DA? This is just speculation, of course, BUT if it was true, I would feel NO sympathy for Marietta. As it is, I believe that Hermione went overboard on this one (in a sense that she could have used different, but some punishment was definitely due, IMO) and I feel for Marietta... but not much. I just.... don't like traytors, even if they are fifteen years old. Alla From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 31 02:38:38 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 02:38:38 -0000 Subject: Crazy idea on why Harry's book 6 stay will be the shortest In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120812 Silvana wrote: > > > Harry has been banished from Quidditch for lifetime by Umbridge. Has this ban been canceled already??? I can't remember reading about it anywhere. All I can recall is Ron (?) hoping the ban would be null and void after Umbridge left. > Cory responded: > > My understanding of Umbridge's ban was that he is banned from playing Quidditch *at Hogwarts*. I don't think she had the authority to stop him from ever playing again, anywhere in the world. Thus, if he were drafted to a pro team, I think he could play. Carol responds: In any case, Umbridge no longer has any authority at Hogwarts and DD will almost certainly reverse the ban. After all, MacGonagall bent or broke the rules to allow Harry to play Quidditch as a first-year. I can't see her or Dumbledore allowing one of Umbridge's decrees to prevent him from playing in his sixth or seventh year any more than I can see DD banning the existence of all clubs or any of the teachers honoring the decree to talk about nothing but their own subjects inside the classroom. Carol From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 31 02:40:42 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 02:40:42 -0000 Subject: JKR's Messages In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120813 Carol adds: Without getting into the Snape aspect of this discussion, it seems clear to me that both Harry and Hermione (and probably Ron as well) need a clearer sense that actions have consequences. If you break rules, you're punished; if you ignore people's feelings, they will respond angrily; if you act without thinking, you'll make things worse instead of better. I don't know if that's how JKR sees things-- she seems to be a little fonder of "the end justifies the means if you're a Gryffindor" than I would like--but I think and hope that both (or all) of them will learn from their experiences and act more wisely in future books. Alla: Ummm, I don't know, Carol. I surely disagree with "if you break the rules you are punished" as one of JKR messages, because as I said many times - I believe that she is saying that breaking the rules for noble purpose is justified ( not always , but quite often). Of course good intentions could sometimes lead you towards the bad the road, but to me it just means that they should learn not to act rash. Carol: "...and that the means is just as important as the end." Alla: Of course I could not resist putting in a small bit of Snape. :o) If means is just important as an end, would you agree that even if Snape acts as he is in order to "toughen Harry up" for battle with Voldemort, he is still not justified in being cruel to Harry (e.g means do not justify the end)? What do you think? Alla From foxmoth at qnet.com Fri Dec 31 03:38:21 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 03:38:21 -0000 Subject: JKR's Messages (was Re: Hermione In Trouble?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120814 > Carol adds: > I don't know about either of you, but I'm bothered by the word > "innate," which suggests that their goodness is inborn--a concept very much at odds with the idea of choice. If they're innately good, they can make mistakes (and they do), but they can't become evil.< Pippin: I'm not sure I follow you. 'Innate' doesn't have to mean 'inviolate.' Innate goodness can be damaged, and is, by the choices of others and by the characters' own choices. Once damaged, the characters may have to fight their own instincts in order to choose good. Further, the characters learn that the choice to resist evil, in themselves or in others, may cost them or their friends dearly. To make the right choice under those conditions takes courage, and that is not innate, it has to be cultivated. Tom Riddle, among other things, chose to cultivate greatness instead. Pippin From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Fri Dec 31 03:44:38 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 03:44:38 -0000 Subject: Marietta and Hermione (was JKR's Messages ) (was Re: Hermione In Trouble?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120815 Alla wrote: "I believe that war was already there in OOP, even though it was not official yet." Del replies: Where was the declaration of war? Where was the self-identified enemy? Where were the casualties of war? Where were the war leaders? Harry had nice answers to all those questions, but that didn't automatically make his explanations the truth. There are people out there with very neat theories about how the little grey men control our governments, for example. But I take their theories for *conspiracy* theories, not for the truth. And I think Harry's stories were just as realistic and plausible as those theories, for many many people in the WW. If Marrietta was supposed to believe in Harry just because other people believed in him, does that mean that Hermione should believe in Heliopaths just because many people, including Luna, believe they exist? No, she doesn't. And nobody had to believe Harry either. And apart from Harry's conspiracy theory, there was no reason to believe there was any kind of war going on. Alla wrote: "Personally, I believe that Marietta had NO business coming to DA int he first place, period. You were talking about Cho being persuasive and I frankly don't remember Cho forcing Marietta to do anything. I mean I remember Marietta not looking very sure in herself, when she came, but besides I think I am turning blank. Could you give me the quote, which supports Cho forcing anything on Marietta, please? If I were to speculate, who knows, maybe Marietta's mother told her to come and spy on DA?" Del replies: At the first meeting, in the Hog's Head: *at the beginning of the meeting: "Cho had just smiled at him and sat down on Ron's right. Her friend, who had curly reddish-blonde hair, did not smile, but gave Harry a thoroughly mistrustful look which plainly told him that, given her way, she would not be here at all". *at the signing of the parchment: "Harry saw Cho's friend give her a rather reproachful look before adding her own name" *at the end of the meeting: "Cho made rather a business of fastening the catch on her bag before leaving, her long dark curtain of hair swinging forward to hide her face, but her friend stood beside her, arms folded, clicking her tongue, so that Cho had little choice but to leave with her. As her friend ushered her through the door, Cho looked back and waved at Harry." In that scene, we can see that: 1. Marrietta didn't want to come. 2. She didn't want to sign the parchment and clearly did it only for Cho's sake. 3. She was very impatient to leave. And we also have to keep in mind that Marrietta didn't even suspect the true nature of the group that was to get formed at this first meeting. It was supposed to be a group to practice DADA, not to fight against Umbridge and the Ministry. Had she known the Trio's real intentions, Marrietta might have refused to come, no matter how much Cho tried to coax her into it. But the worst is during the first DA lesson: "She laughed. Her friend Marrietta looked at them rather sourly and turned away. 'Don't mind her,' Cho muttered. 'She doesn't really want to be here but I made her come with me. Her parents have forbidden her to do anything that might upset Umbridge. You see - her mum works for the Ministry.'" It seems pretty obvious to me that Marrietta would never have come to any further DA meeting if Cho hadn't made her come. I think Marrietta would agree with you : she had NO business coming to the DA meetings in the first place. She sure didn't want to. Alla wrote: "I just.... don't like traytors, even if they are fifteen years old." Del replies: Agreed. But the question is : who was the traitor in Marrietta's eyes? If she didn't believe Harry's conspiracy theories about LV being back, wouldn't she also believe that Harry was the traitor to the government, to his country and people? Del From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 31 03:57:36 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 03:57:36 -0000 Subject: Crazy idea on why Harry's book 6 stay will be the shortest In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120816 Tammy wrote: > > Ah, but Krum was a professional Quidditch player and a student... so why not Harry too? Though I must say, I don't like the idea of Harry becoming a pro in his 6th year, perhaps 7th. Honestly I'd think he has too much on his plate already, what with being a student and the whole "killing Voldemort and saving the entire WW" thing. Quidditch will just have to wait a year or two. > > Geoff responded: > I doubt whether that would be allowed in the UK real world. In the > old Eastern Bloc, things like that happened in Communist days so Krum might have been able to play as a professional as it was only 5 years or so after the Iron Curtain came down. Carol adds: And we might also note that Krum is starting his seventh year at eighteen. Apparently his Quidditch career has interfered to some degree with his education. Either that or the Durmstrang students are on a different schedule from the Hogwarts students, who start their first year at age eleven and would therefore be seventeen at the beginning of seventh year, regardless of when their birthdays fell during the year. (We now know that Hermione will turn eighteen a few weeks into her seventh year, but like the other students in her year, she'll be seventeen when it begins.) As for Harry, I'm hoping the Trio will become aurors, but if he wants to be a pro Quidditch player post-Voldemort, more power to him. I'm sure he'd enjoy playing against Krum in the World Cup if they both survive. Just not while Harry's in school and VW2 is being fought. Carol From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 31 04:04:23 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 04:04:23 -0000 Subject: Marietta and Hermione (was JKR's Messages ) (was Re: Hermione In Trouble?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120817 > Del replies: If Marrietta was supposed to believe in Harry just because other people believed in him, does that mean that Hermione should believe in Heliopaths just because many people, including Luna, believe they exist? No, she doesn't. And nobody had to believe Harry either. And apart from Harry's conspiracy theory, there was no reason to believe there was any kind of war going on. Alla: Here is what I believe. Harry is NOT just anybody for WW. He is someone because of whom Voldemort was gone for fourteen years. I believe that WW owed Harry to hear him out first, NOT to paint him as crazy maniac, because people were too scared to look truth in the eyes. And there WAS a solid reason to believe that something goes on - Cedric dead at the end of GoF. Del replies: > At the first meeting, in the Hog's Head: *at the beginning of the meeting: "Cho had just smiled at him and sat down on Ron's right. Her friend, who had curly reddish-blonde hair, did not smile, but gave Harry a thoroughly mistrustful look which plainly told him that, given her way, she would not be here at all". *at the signing of the parchment: "Harry saw Cho's friend give her a rather reproachful look before >adding her own name" *at the end of the meeting: "Cho made rather a business of fastening the catch on her bag before leaving, her long dark curtain of hair swinging forward to hide her > face, but her friend stood beside her, arms folded, clicking her tongue, so that Cho had little choice but to leave with her. As her friend ushered her through the door, Cho looked back and waved at Harry." In that scene, we can see that: 1. Marrietta didn't want to come. 2. She didn't want to sign the parchment and clearly did it only for Cho's sake. 3. She was very impatient to leave. Alla: Thank you - those are excellent quotes and yes, Cho appears to be persuasive, BUT I am still not convinced that Marietta cannot resist Cho at all. Look at your last quote - "but her friend stood beside her, arms folded, clicking her tongue, so that Cho had little choice but to leave with her." Marietta forces Cho to leave, not vice versa. Something tells me that if marietta REALLY did not want to come. nothing of what Cho said would have made her. Del: But the worst is during the first DA lesson: "She laughed. Her friend Marrietta looked at them rather sourly and turned away.'Don't mind her,' Cho muttered. 'She doesn't really want to be here but I made her come with me. Her parents have forbidden her to do anything that might upset Umbridge. You see - her mum works for the Ministry.'" It seems pretty obvious to me that Marrietta would never have come to any further DA meeting if Cho hadn't made her come. Alla: Yes, this quote is bad, all right, but again I am not convinced that Cho's powers of persuasion are THAT great as she would like to think. She does not appear to be able to persuade Harry in anything does not she? Who knows, maybe Marietta subtly worked on her to make her think that way. You know, I begin to think that Pettigrew worked this way too ( just wild speculation, of course) - making people to think what HE wanted them to think ( like making remus and Sirius to suspect each other, etc.) Del replies: Agreed. But the question is : who was the traitor in Marrietta's eyes? If she didn't believe Harry's conspiracy theories about LV being back,wouldn't she also believe that Harry was the traitor to the government, to his country and people? Alla: Then my only advise to her will be to open her eyes and grow up. Sorry for such categorical statement. Just my opinion, of course Alla From inkling108 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 31 04:42:36 2004 From: inkling108 at yahoo.com (inkling108) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 04:42:36 -0000 Subject: The Veil, HP & LOTR ?] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120818 (Big snip) Geoff wrote: > > I go back though to my first point; we cannot make characters from > > each book fit the same template. There is no "one size fits all". GEO replied: Agreed, but the comparisons are fun though I don't think they can be used to predict future events. Inkling now: True -- although looking at some of the similar patterns may give hints. For example: A hero who feels more and more alone even as his friends risk everything for his sake (Frodo/Harry, although I agree that Harry in many ways resembles Aragorn more than Frodo). This loneliness will intensify for Harry as the implications of the prophecy sink in. How will he deal with it? Will he be able to endure the loneliness and struggle till the end, or will he fall short as Frodo did, and be saved in spite of it by some unexpected and unintentional grace from friend or foe? A mirroring effect between the protagonist and an "evil" twin (in LOTR Frodo/Gollum, in HP Harry/You know who). A sense of "I could have been you. I'm afraid of turning into you. In some ways I *am* you already." This double identity (Tom Riddle, as John Granger points out, could be translated as Twin Enigma) is the key to everything in the HP series and so it's particularly tricky to compare it to LOTR. But Gollum did save Frodo in the end. The connection between them proved redemptive against all expectation and I think the same will be true of the connection between Harry and Voldy. In LOTR, Gollum was the wild card, a character whose ultimate allegiance was uncertain and whose actions tipped the balance (literally). In HP that role could be played by Wormtail and Snape or both. Another LOTR plot pattern that I think we may also see in books 6 and 7 of HP is that of a fellowship which is strong against external enemies but can be weakened from within -- as with Boromir in LOTR. JKR has been setting up this possibility with with several characters. Here are some that come to mind immediately: --> Ron is preoccupied with money. He "hates being poor." JKR has made such a point of this so often that I feel sure he will face a major temptation to do with money, and how he handles it will be crucial to the fate of the good guys. --> Snape goes more than a little bit mad when his emotions are aroused. He did so in the Shreiking Shack in book 3, and again when he discovered Harry in the pensieve. This is especially dangerous for a spy who depends on occulmency to keep his cover. As he told Harry "Fools...who cannot control their emotions...stand no chance against his powers!" He may also change his allegiance in a moment of emotion with catastrophic consequences for the side he betrays. (As you can tell I'm not sure whose side he's really on!) --> Lupin cares too much about approval and being liked. This is what prevented him from telling Dumbledore about Sirius being an animagus in book 3 and from reining in James and Sirius when he was a prefect. If he once again keeps silent on some crucial information because of this fear, the good guys are in trouble. --> Hermione can be too clever for her own good -- as discussed in recent posts, her brilliant ideas can have unforeseen complications. --> Moody has a tendency to be paranoid. This may cause him to overlook a serious danger in his preoccupation with a minor or even imaginary one -- He may strain a gnat while swallowing a camel. There may be more but I'm getting sleepy! Please add to the list if you are so inclined. Neville, by contrast, may prove the most trustworthy of all because he has faced his weakness -- fear of power -- and is mastering it. It may be significant that Neville was the last man standing with Harry during the battle at the Ministry at the end of OOtP. Neville may turn out to be Harry's Sam. Inkling, turning in for the night. From chnc1024 at AOL.COM Fri Dec 31 04:49:37 2004 From: chnc1024 at AOL.COM (chnc1024 at AOL.COM) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 23:49:37 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Remus and Sibyll sitting in a tree ( wasRe: Trelawny real... Message-ID: <12c.5437906c.2f063461@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120819 In a message dated 12/30/2004 4:55:53 PM Pacific Standard Time, vmonte at yahoo.com writes: vmonte wrote: Not so much that he is ESE LUPIN!, but more like 'I may have killed a friend or Order member while I was a werewolf' kind of thing. Wasn't there someone in Moody's picture who all they found of him was pieces? Was he killed by a DE, or by Lupin? I don't know why I feel like Lupin feels guilty about something. And what are the chances that he's never killed? *************************************************** Chancie: I don't know if I think Lupin feels "guilty" because he killed someone or maybe its just the fact that he blamed Sirius for James's death. He thought Peter was dead, and maybe he felt as though he should have done something to stop it. Then felt guilty because when he learned Sirius was innocent, that he blamed him in the first place. Do we know if Lupin really had any other friends other than the Marauders? Maybe he felt he couldn't really be friends with others for fear of killing them durring the full moon. After he left Hogwarts I doubt he had a safe place for his transformations like the Shreeking Shack provided. I guess what I'm trying to say is that maybe his guilty feelings are just because he feels responsible for the deaths of the others. Like Harry felt for Sirius's. That maybe if I had done something diffrent my friends would still be alive. Chancie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From bob.oliver at cox.net Fri Dec 31 05:33:50 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 05:33:50 -0000 Subject: Punishing Marietta Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120820 Okay, there has been a lot of back and forth about Hermione's hex that caused Marietta's pustule problem. Much of the issue revolves around whether Marietta can be considered a traitor and/or if it is appropriate for Hermione to punish her for doing what she (Marietta) thought was right. Let me pour more gasoline on the fire. It seems to me that actions such as Hermione's hex can be undertaken for two reasons, both of which can be legitimate in certain circumstances and illegitimate in others. 1) To enforce rules. This implies that the rules are at least reasonably clear and that the party invoking the punishment has the right to enforce the rules; 2) To throw down a gauntlet and draw battlelines, i.e. this is where we stand and there is where you stand and all parties be prepared to defend your territory Most of the discussion has been focused around (1), i.e. were there rules and did Hermione have the right to enforce them. But it seems to me that Hermione's actions clearly fall under circumstance (2), the throwing down of the gauntlet. Now, that raises all sorts of questions. Is such an action legitimate? Well, looking at the history of such behavior, the practical (and even in many cases the legal) answer is "Yes, providing you win." To take one set of examples, the American Revolution, the Boston Tea Party is legitimate protest largely because the colonists eventually won, the Intolerable Acts are illegitimate attempts at repression because the British eventually lost. Both were conscious acts of provocation, but the legitimacy of the action rests on its success or failure in eventually bringing about a certain outcome. Even then differences of opinion remain, but the verdict of history tends to weigh pretty heavy. Or, to paraphrase James Clavell, "Their is absolutely no excuse for defying legally constituted authority -- unless of course you win. If you win everything is all right." So, where does that leave us with Marietta? Well, to use the real world as my template (which I know some people don't like but it's what I do), my answer is: If Hermione's side wins, her action will go down in history as a legitimate and brave blow for defying the forces of oppression. If they lose it probably won't matter because everybody will have worse problems to deal with. True, that puts Hermione on tricky ground. It's ground that has seen some pretty dark figures, such as Lenin and Stalin. But it's also ground where she is in some mighty distinguished company, including John Hancock, Sam Adams, Thomas Paine, and most of the Sons of Liberty. Lupinlore From eggplant9998 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 31 06:55:39 2004 From: eggplant9998 at yahoo.com (eggplant9998) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 06:55:39 -0000 Subject: Marietta and Hermione (was JKR's Messages ) (was Re: Hermione In Trouble?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120821 "delwynmarch" wrote: > How do you know whether an organisation > is good or bad when you don't > have all the info about it? You use a thing called "Human Judgment"; there is no guarantee you'll get it right of course, but it's all we have so you do the best you can. Even today we don't have ALL the information on the Nazis, but even so I am ready to commit myself ; OK here goes, I think the Nazis were evil. I hope I'm not being too controversial here. > I'm curious to know how a self-proclaimed > unethical person like you defines a good > organisation vs an evil one? I don't think definitions are very important in everyday life unless you're dealing in mathematics or formal logic, examples are far far more important, but if pressed I suppose I'd say a good organization is one that does mostly good and a evil organization is one that does mostly evil. It works for me anyway. > Hermione *made* them sign the parchment My copy of the book must be defective; I'm going to ask for my money back, it doesn't include the scene where Hermione puts a gun to their head. > did Hermione's hex prevent Marrietta > from ratting on the DA? Obviously not, but it did minimize the negative effects that ratting would have. > Morality exists for its own sake, not for any other point. I could not disagree more!! I start from the position that causing people pain, physical or emotional, is bad and then I build my morality on top of that. To glibly say that doing X is good because doing X is good and ignore the fact that doing X puts thousands of people in agony is just plain crazy. That's what I meant when I said if that what morality is then I don't need it or want it. But I don't think that's what morality is. Morality is the greatest invention of all time and its purpose is to minimize pain, if it doesn't do that then it has no use. Eggplant From eggplant9998 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 31 07:11:24 2004 From: eggplant9998 at yahoo.com (eggplant9998) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 07:11:24 -0000 Subject: Marietta and Hermione (was JKR's Messages ) (was Re: Hermione In Trouble?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120822 wrote: > Where was the declaration of war? JK Rowling herself said there was a war, and I don't mean to be rude or anything but I think she has a tad more authority in these matters than you do. > Where was the self-identified enemy? Huh? > Where were the casualties of war? Are you joking? > Where were the war leaders? OK, you're joking. Eggplant From chnc1024 at AOL.COM Fri Dec 31 07:15:02 2004 From: chnc1024 at AOL.COM (chnc1024 at AOL.COM) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 02:15:02 EST Subject: Hex, Jinx, Curse, Charm & Spells Message-ID: <1ac.2eae84ea.2f065676@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120823 Chancie: OK Question. Does anyone know what qualifies Spells as either, a Hex Jinx, Curse, or Charm? I can't seem to find any kind of defining trait, except of course a Curse is bad. But it seems pretty much up in the air for the rest. I'd really like to know if anyone else has any ideas on this. Chancie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From eggplant9998 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 31 07:56:55 2004 From: eggplant9998 at yahoo.com (eggplant9998) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 07:56:55 -0000 Subject: Marietta and Hermione (was JKR's Messages ) (was Re: Hermione In Trouble?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120824 "pippin_999" wrote: > the centaurs were going to drag Harry and > Hermione off and do whatever they did > to Umbridge. You have 5 seconds to choose between the following two alternatives: 1) Certain death. 2) Possible death I don't know about you but I think I'd rather pick #2. > If her plan had worked But that's the exact point, Hermione thought that if she was smart Umbridge's plan would NOT work, and as it turned out Hermione was absolutely correct. Eggplant From udderpd at yahoo.co.uk Fri Dec 31 09:00:37 2004 From: udderpd at yahoo.co.uk (udder_pen_dragon) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 09:00:37 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] The Veil in the Chamber of Secrets? (was Re: more predictions from Jo) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041231090037.34578.qmail@web25302.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120825 justcarol67 wrote: Fridwulfa wrote: > Life is not really that complicated. Slytherin himself could have taken the Veil with him when he left the Castle. > When he dies (steping accidentally to the other side of the veil while pacing absentmindedly reading the D. P) his heirs/descendants/ascendants and greedy neighbours divide his fortune but no one seems to want the ugly thing, too big to keep in the living room, it doesn't really go with the curtains and the couch... so, of course, they donate it to the Ministry, and there it has been since. Carol responds: I don't think it's the Veil itself but the arched doorway it covers that's the entrance to the Other World. I think the MoM was built on that spot because it was a site where the ancient Druids held their rituals, perhaps including ritual sacrifice. Death would be the first of the Mysteries, and the others would have grown up around it. Eventually the ministry itself would have built its headquarters where the Mysteries were already being explored. Speculation, I know, but notice that the archway seems ancient and seems to have an equally ancient amphiteater built around it. Another possibility is that the doorway was used for public (WW) executions. At any rate, the Veil itself merely covers the entrance and moving it would accomplish nothing--except leaving the entrance to the Other World exposed to mortal eyes. Carol UdderPD here Just a small point, the use of sites like Glastonbury, Avebury and Stonehenge predate's the Druids by thousands of years. Also to my knowledge we have no real idea what the original use of the sites was. UdderPD. 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 esmereldah at yahoo.com Thu Dec 30 23:50:31 2004 From: esmereldah at yahoo.com (Lucy Wooten) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 15:50:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: Peter Pettigrew's House In-Reply-To: <1104448901.9400.53771.m21@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <20041230235031.1356.qmail@web52204.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120826 Does anyone have an opinion on which house Peter Pettigrew belonged to? McGonagall refers to him as "that fat little boy who was always tagging them [the Marauders] at Hogwarts". She doesn't seem to know him very well. -Lucy From udderpd at yahoo.co.uk Fri Dec 31 09:30:03 2004 From: udderpd at yahoo.co.uk (udder_pen_dragon) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 09:30:03 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Do we know where the MoM is? (was; The Veil in the Chamber of Secrets? ) In-Reply-To: <20041231090037.34578.qmail@web25302.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041231093003.62982.qmail@web25307.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120827 In my last post I wrote; Just a small point, the use of sites like Glastonbury, Avebury and Stonehenge predate's the Druids by thousands of years. Also to my knowledge we have no real idea what the original use of these sites was. While considering this I thought 'do we actually know where the MoM is'? Of course we know that there is a telephone box in the middle of London that gives access to it. But it is a Magic telephone box and to my mind it doesn't follow that the Ministry is anywhere near it, ergo the Veil (The gate to the underworld?) could be anywhere? TTFN UdderPD. 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] 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 klevasseur at earthlink.net Fri Dec 31 00:00:47 2004 From: klevasseur at earthlink.net (ms_luna_knows) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 00:00:47 -0000 Subject: Patronus-Animagus / JKR's 2 questions (theory) / Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120828 absolutfrux at y... wrote: > > > I'd like to bring up for discussion a theory I've come up with > regarding JKR's 2 questions, the ones she said we ought to be thinking > about more. Why didn't Voldemort die? And why didn't Dumbledore try to > kill him in the MOM? Obviously it's stated in the books that Voldemort > took measures to ensure that he never experienced mortal death; snip> >. What if one of his measures > involved sending his spirit/essence into the one who defeated/killed > him? This would operate on several levels to his advantage. > > 1) If his current body was weak enough to be defeated by another > power, , it would follow that the body > to be possessed would be stronger than his own, therefore: quick and > easy way to overcome defeat and turn it into an even greater coup for > Voldemort! > Ms.Luna replies Didn't he, LV, try this in the MoM towards the end of the battle in the OotP? It didn't work because Harry was too full of love/longing...and LV couldn't stand it and left Harry's body. > 2) If the one who defeated him was working on the side of good (ie > fighting against him instead of trying to usurp him), what better way > to infiltrate the opposition than to control its strongest warrior? snip> Luna again, But, Harry at this point is not the *stongest* warrior, that would be DD, IMHO. LV didn't try to possess DD at any point. He was trying to possess Harry to avoid DD, prove something to DD and to Harry. > > 3) It would ensure that he would never lack a corporeal body in which > to wreak havoc. Luna once more, If LV possessed a living body, he definately could lose it...through the death of that body. Remember Quirrell? > snip> > I'm trying to fit my theory in here. His essence > attempted to possess the "conqueror" (ie Harry), which explains why he > left an imprint on the boy, Parseltongue, similar wand affinity, > ability to access each others' minds etc. Luna again, That seems like a plausable explaination for their similarities, but weren't those similarities explained by DD, saying that LV transferred some of his powers to Harry during the AK curse? So, are you saying that DD's version is wrong or he is misinterpreting the information? >> I don't think Dumbledore knows precisely what's going on, but he isn't > taking any chances, I should think. This understandably frustrates > Voldemort a great deal, which is possibly why he maliciously taunts > Dumbledore about not wanting to kill him. He WANTS Dumbledore to try. Luna, If LV could die with the death of the one he possesses, why would he want DD to try to kill him? So he could possess Harry? With what you're saying LV could have possessed anyone during his time in exile. Why did he not possess someone during that time. Why wait so long for Harry to come of age...to Possess him? No, he needed/wanted Harry for another purpose, to bring back his own body, by using Harry's blood. Plus, if LV really wanted too, couldn't he have possessed Wormtail, or anyone else and come back to power sooner. It seems to me, and I am sure I'll be set right, that LV couldn't or wouldn't (probably the former) possess someone because he was too weak. After he gets his own body back he has no reason to possess anyone. I think DD doesn't kill LV because of the prophecy. LV taunts DD because he knows that DD knows something about the prophecy and is, IMO, trying to get it out of him through taunts. It obviously doesn't work because DD is above that. > I've also been trying to fit in an explanation for Dumbledore's > imfamous "gleam of triumph", Luna one more time, I've *heard* the theory thrown around that the *gleam of triumph* was because DD undersood that because LV used Harry's/human blood to come back, that he was no longer immortal and therefore will be easier for Harry to kill Thanks for the interesting post. I enjoy reading the theories that stretch the envelope. -Luna From vmonte at yahoo.com Fri Dec 31 11:26:46 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 11:26:46 -0000 Subject: The Veil, HP & LOTR ?] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120829 Inkling wrote: snip --> Snape goes more than a little bit mad when his emotions are aroused. He did so in the Shreiking Shack in book 3, and again when he discovered Harry in the pensieve. This is especially dangerous for a spy who depends on occulmency to keep his cover. As he told Harry "Fools...who cannot control their emotions...stand no chance against his powers!" He may also change his allegiance in a moment of emotion with catastrophic consequences for the side he betrays. (As you can tell I'm not sure whose side he's really on!) snip Neville, by contrast, may prove the most trustworthy of all because he has faced his weakness -- fear of power -- and is mastering it. It may be significant that Neville was the last man standing with Harry during the battle at the Ministry at the end of OOtP. Neville may turn out to be Harry's Sam. vmonte responds: You've nailed Snape, I completely agree. I remember reading PoA and thinking that Snape was an unstable person. He was frightening at the end of PoA when his emotions exploded at the hospital wing. I've seen more than enough evidence that the man is completely ruled by his emotions. (The contempt that Snape has for Harry is laughable considering that he himself is ruled by his emotions; and that nasty jab he gives Harry in the first Potions class when he talks about 'our new celebrity,'etc. From what I can tell, Harry doesn't want the celebrity, it's Snape who craves recognition. Just look at the way he behaved at the end of PoA when he found out that he was going to lose his chance for an award.) I've always secretly felt that Trelawny's 2nd prophecy was about Snape. I think that if Snape were to join Voldemort the consequences for the Order would be devastating. Wormtail helping Voldemort rise to power--that's laughable. Wormtail's help may have actually caused Voldemort harm. Now Voldemort has Harry's blood inside him, which is probably going to be fatal for Voldemort (DD's gleam, etc). Also, Wormtail now owes Harry a life debt, which I feel he will repay in the end. So I think that Wormtail, although a bad guy, hasn't really helped Voldemort at all. Snape on the other hand would completely devestate the Order, especially since Dumbledore seems to completely trust the man. I also agree with you about Neville. It will be beause of the two boys that Voldemort's downfall will occur. The prophecy is about both boys. From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Fri Dec 31 12:38:20 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 12:38:20 -0000 Subject: Marietta and Hermione (was JKR's Messages ) (was Re: Hermione In Trouble?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120830 Alla wrote: "Here is what I believe. Harry is NOT just anybody for WW. He is someone because of whom Voldemort was gone for fourteen years. I believe that WW owed Harry to hear him out first, NOT to paint him as crazy maniac, because people were too scared to look truth in the eyes." Del replies: I disagree. The WW owed Harry gratitude for somehow ridding them of LV 14 years ago. But Harry didn't do it *on purpose*, he didn't make any choice, he didn't take any decision. He just *happened* to vanquish LV. So I really don't see why anyone should give any ear to whatever he says more than a decade later : he doesn't know how he did what he did, so why should he know any better now? I also disagree that all those who refused to listen to Harry were just too scared of the truth. I refuse to agree with the alien conspiracy theorists, but it's not because I'm afraid of what it would imply : it's just because I don't think they are right. Alla wrote: "And there WAS a solid reason to believe that something goes on - Cedric dead at the end of GoF." Del replies: And as I said Harry had a nice conspiracy theory to explain that. But the simplest explanation was that Harry killed Cedric somehow and DD was covering up for him (I was watching "criminal detectives" on Discovery Channel yesterday : when a 13-year-old boy disappeared after going to his best friend's home, and it was known that the two boys were rivals over a girl, the police examined the simple possibility that the friend killed the boy out of jealousy, which happened to be the right explanation). So yes people had reasons to believe that something was going on, but not that LV was back. Consider this : 1. Nobody knows how Harry got rid of LV 2. Harry is the only one who claims to have seen LV reborn 3. Harry is a known Parselmouth Just those 3 are enough to raise suspicions about *Harry*. Alla wrote: "Marietta forces Cho to leave, not vice versa. Something tells me that if marietta REALLY did not want to come. nothing of what Cho said would have made her." Del replies: Let me re-quote the first episode, at the beginning of the meeting: "Cho had just smiled at him and sat down on Ron's right. Her friend, who had curly reddish-blonde hair, did not smile, but gave Harry a thoroughly mistrustful look which plainly told him that, given her way, she would not be here at all". Notice the "given her way". Marrietta would not have been here if Cho hadn't insisted, even Harry realises that. Moreover, as I already said, when she accepted to come, Marrietta didn't know what the DA would *really* be about. She might not have been enthusiastic about a not-forbidden DADA practice group, but an illegal anti-Umbridge group was another matter entirely! Alla wrote: "I am not convinced that Cho's powers of persuasion are THAT great as she would like to think. She does not appear to be able to persuade Harry in anything does not she?" Del replies: As I already said, Cho's tears didn't have any effect on Harry, but it's highly likely that they had some effects on Marrietta, for several reasons: 1. Harry didn't care about Cho anywhere as much as Marrietta did. Harry could watch Cho cry without feeling moved, but as her friend I doubt Marrietta could do the same. 2. Even Harry sometimes gives into Hermione's harrassment tactics just to stop her harrassing him. He paid the fee for SPEW and took the badge, for example. He also agreed to check on Sirius at 12GP even though he was sure it would be useless and he was convinced Sirius was being tortured all the time. Marrietta could have agreed to go to the DA lessons just to stop Cho harrassing her about them all the time. Alla wrote: "Who knows, maybe Marietta subtly worked on her to make her think that way. You know, I begin to think that Pettigrew worked this way too (just wild speculation, of course) - making people to think what HE wanted them to think ( like making remus and Sirius to suspect each other, etc.)" Del replies: That's another conspiracy theory to explain in a complicated way something that has a very simple explanation : Marrietta never wanted to belong to the DA, but she followed Cho because she is her friend. Just like Ron and Hermione follow Harry sometimes even when they really don't want to. Alla wrote: "Then my only advise to her will be to open her eyes and grow up." Del replies: Open her eyes to what? Something that only Harry saw? Grow up? Isn't that *exactly* what she did, by not going with the group, and doing what she thought was right? Del From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Fri Dec 31 13:05:52 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 13:05:52 -0000 Subject: Marietta and Hermione (was JKR's Messages ) (was Re: Hermione In Trouble?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120831 Eggplant wrote: "You use a thing called "Human Judgment"; there is no guarantee you'll get it right of course, but it's all we have so you do the best you can." Del replies: And yet somehow Marrietta is evil for being wrong in her judgement? How do you know that she didn't do exactly what you describe : use her human judgement and do the best she could? Eggplant wrote: "Even today we don't have ALL the information on the Nazis, but even so I am ready to commit myself ; OK here goes, I think the Nazis were evil. I hope I'm not being too controversial here. " Del replies: It's easy to say so today. What would have been interesting would have been knowing what you and I would have thought of the Nazis in 1938. Eggplant wrote: "if pressed I suppose I'd say a good organization is one that does mostly good and a evil organization is one that does mostly evil. It works for me anyway." Del replies: What made the DA a good organisation according to that definition, in the eyes of someone who did not believe that LV was back? Eggplant wrote "My copy of the book must be defective; I'm going to ask for my money back, it doesn't include the scene where Hermione puts a gun to their head." Del replies: Did she give them a choice? Ernie *did* try not to sign but she cornered him. He or anybody else couldn't wiggle out of that one without looking bad. For teenagers, such things matter a lot, being popular and looking good are real pressures. Eggplant wrote: "it did minimize the negative effects that ratting would have." Del replies: Such as? I fail to see what negative effects were avoided due to the hex. Eggplant wrote: "I start from the position that causing people pain, physical or emotional, is bad and then I build my morality on top of that." Del replies: Good luck! Eggplant wrote: "To glibly say that doing X is good because doing X is good and ignore the fact that doing X puts thousands of people in agony is just plain crazy." Del replies: Is it good to put some people in prison, even though this puts many of them in emotional and sometimes physical agony, even though it splits families apart? Del From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Fri Dec 31 13:27:53 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 13:27:53 -0000 Subject: Marietta and Hermione (was JKR's Messages ) (was Re: Hermione In Trouble?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120832 Eggplant wrote: "JK Rowling herself said there was a war, and I don't mean to be rude or anything but I think she has a tad more authority in these matters than you do." Del replies: You're not answering the question. On that matter, I don't care what JKR says *about* the books, I care what she says *in* the books. And in the books there was no official and public declaration of war. Just the word of a single teenage boy. I, Del, wrote earlier: "Where was the self-identified enemy?" Eggplant answered: "Huh?" Del replies: Nobody saw LV, except for Harry. A *single* teenage boy. Where is LV's army? Nobody has seen LV reborn, and nobody has claimed to be working for him. To use those WWII analogies you seem to like, nobody has seen Hitler, and nobody is claiming to be a Nazi. So where is the enemy army and what are they doing? Del, and then Eggplant: "Where were the casualties of war?" "Are you joking?" Del replies: No I'm not. Where were the casualties *of war* ? I'm not talking about those deaths that Harry attributes to LV or his buddies and that the MoM explains in other ways. I'm talking about people who were officially killed by the enemy. There aren't any for the public to see, unless they believe Harry's conspiracy theory. To use a WWII analogy again, not only has nobody seen Hitler or a Nazi, but Germany hasn't invaded Austria or Poland either. So what war are we talking about? Hence, I maintain that the WW wasn't at war in OoP, because: 1. There is no visible enemy 2. There are no visible war casualties That doesn't contradict the fact that there was a war going on in the WW during OoP. But that war was very secret, it was in no way an open thing. So I find it a bit unfair to expect the public to not only know about it but even take a side in it. The only visible war that was taking place in OoP was between Harry&DD on one side and everyone else on the other side. Harry had come up with a conspiracy theory that DD was supporting, and the MoM was fighting it. People *did* know about that one, and they did take a side in it. As you said in your other post : it's all about how much information people have access to, and then exercising their best judgement. Del From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Fri Dec 31 13:37:53 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 13:37:53 -0000 Subject: Punishing Marietta In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120833 Lupinlore wrote: "Or, to paraphrase James Clavell, "Their is absolutely no excuse for defying legally constituted authority -- unless of course you win. If you win everything is all right." So, where does that leave us with Marietta? Well, to use the real world as my template (which I know some people don't like but it's what I do), my answer is: If Hermione's side wins, her action will go down in history as a legitimate and brave blow for defying the forces of oppression. If they lose it probably won't matter because everybody will have worse problems to deal with." Del replies: Nice post Lupinlore! I particularly like that quote above. So true. And yet completely overlooked when dealing with Marrietta. As Clavell said, there is *no excuse* for defying legally constituted authority. And yet somehow it's *Marrietta* who is the bad egg for *supporting* the legally constituted authority! Ah but yes, that's because: 1. We know Harry is saying the truth because we're living practically in his head. 2. Harry's side will win because he is the hero of the series. All well and nice except that: 1. Marrietta isn't living inside Harry's head, so she doesn't know she'd better believe every word that comes out of his mouth. 2. Marrietta doesn't know she is a character in a series named after Harry so she doesn't know she'd better do everything Harry asks her to. In short : Marrietta doesn't know Harry is the Hero. It's very easy to judge other people according to what *we* know, but is it right or fair? Del From dfrankiswork at netscape.net Fri Dec 31 14:16:42 2004 From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (davewitley) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 14:16:42 -0000 Subject: JKR's Messages (was Re: Hermione In Trouble?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120834 Carol wrote: > I don't know about either of you, but I'm bothered by the word > "innate," which suggests that their goodness is inborn--a concept very > much at odds with the idea of choice. If they're innately good, they > can make mistakes (and they do), but they can't become evil. I haven't been following this discussion very closely but I had the same trouble, and found the JKR interview to see if there's any context (go to the goat pen and search on 'innate'). There isn't much (it's the alleged corrupting influence of the books) but she did add that she believes all children are innately good unless damaged, which has implications for Riddle. One wonders what she believes about adults, and the processes by which children become adults. Presumably 'damage' in some form is involved. I still think, though, that she seems to be saying that the trio will make good choices (and not because she has absolute control as author), which obviously raises the vexed question of what is meant by a choice if it's not a morally neutral one. To be fair, I know of nobody who has actually succeeded in coming up with a coherent theory of choice, so perhaps it's asking a bit much to expect JKR to make characters who fit one. David From nrenka at yahoo.com Fri Dec 31 14:30:54 2004 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 14:30:54 -0000 Subject: Punishing Marietta In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120835 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: > Del replies: > > As Clavell said, there is *no excuse* for defying legally > constituted authority. And yet somehow it's *Marrietta* who is the > bad egg for *supporting* the legally constituted authority! With that quote, I think the 'no excuse' part is perhaps genuinely best taken as a rhetorical trope, because if you pushed him an inch, he would probably admit that there are many, many excuses for defying legally constituted authority--under the right circumstances, of course. > It's very easy to judge other people according to what *we* know, > but is it right or fair? True--we need to remember that when judging characters, their level of knowledge. And with Marietta, there are a lot of unknown factors in operation as well. Still doesn't get her completely off the hook for me, for general thematic reasons. She's a good parallel in some regards to Percy--let's call them similar problems, in broad strokes. Both people are in situations that leave them not completely unsympathetic. However, both people, operating on the "yay authority!" perspective, screw up factually--and it is presented to us at least in part as various kinds of moral and logical failings. Percy elevated an authority who, if he had really processed all of the information fully, was already suspect to him, into the supreme position. That's dereliction of duty of a citizen, in a sense, to keep your government good. Marietta broke faith with her friends out of fear (and if we're playing a judging game, her lapses are, because of that, somewhat lesser), but she also failed to keep trust in those who kept trust in her, and also fell to the temptations of the status quo. Rowling's Big'n'Obvious Point in OotP is that Authority does not always do the right things and should not be followed blindly--no, it is practically a moral imperative to deny it at times. A point with a fine and long tradition in political theory, of course. What makes it fun is that she gives us characters with conflicted situations, and doesn't leave everything totally black and white. I think the worst and prevalent error that we as analysts make in this series is the wholehearted embrace of the slippery slope, though... -Nora is traveling and thus incommunicado the rest of the day: enjoy From nrenka at yahoo.com Fri Dec 31 14:37:01 2004 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 14:37:01 -0000 Subject: JKR's Messages (was Re: Hermione In Trouble?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120836 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "davewitley" wrote: > > Carol: >> I don't know about either of you, but I'm bothered by the word >> "innate," which suggests that their goodness is inborn--a concept >> very much at odds with the idea of choice. If they're innately >> good, they can make mistakes (and they do), but they can't become >> evil. > Dave: > I still think, though, that she seems to be saying that the trio > will make good choices (and not because she has absolute control as > author), which obviously raises the vexed question of what is meant > by a choice if it's not a morally neutral one. If I may just add in, yet again, the famous and perhaps fundamentally thematic quote from Dumbledore in CoS is that our choices SHOW what we really are. This does speak to a certain, perhaps uncomfortable to some, evocation of essentialism. However, it's part of the cosmology, and cosmology may be criticised (you don't have to like it), but it's THERE, and must be accepted as such. My personal parsing is that, in JKR's world, I suspect that some people are more inclined to do what is good, and some inclined to do what is evil. Those essences are affected by upbringing, but their manifestation into the world is a case of choice on the part of the person. Draco, for instance, is naturally inclined to be selfish and jealous, and his choices as manifested in his actions show us this. Snape is naturally inclined to be god-knows-what...forget I mentioned him. Pointless to argue about a character who none of us really understand. Harry is naturally inclined to be a good person, and at times has to struggle to make the choices that correspond. Compared to Draco, perhaps it's that Draco is unwilling to invest the effort? Let's not talk about free will. Please. :) -Nora goes off to play with the dogs: woof. From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Fri Dec 31 14:58:40 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 14:58:40 -0000 Subject: Punishing Marietta In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120837 > Lupinlore wrote: > > It seems to me that actions such as Hermione's hex can be undertaken > for two reasons, both of which can be legitimate in certain > circumstances and illegitimate in others. > > 1) To enforce rules. This implies that the rules are at least > reasonably clear and that the party invoking the punishment has the > right to enforce the rules; > > 2) To throw down a gauntlet and draw battlelines, i.e. this is where > we stand and there is where you stand and all parties be prepared to > defend your territory > Neri: Erm... there's a third reason: simple security consideration. Hermione's jinx wasn't designed against Marietta personally. It was designed to warn the DA that they have a traitor in their midst. This is why it was pustules spelling "sneak", so the traitor won't be able to hide it in any way. We have very clear canon that this was the case, a day after the Hog's Head meeting: ******************* OotP, Ch. 17: 'Someone must have blabbed to her!' Ron said angrily. 'They can't have done,' said Hermione in a low voice. 'You're so naive,' said Ron, 'you think just because you're all honourable and trustworthy ? ' 'No, they can't have done, because I put a jinx on that piece of parchment we all signed,' said Hermione grimly. 'Believe me, if anyone's run off and told Umbridge, we'll know exactly who they are and they will really regret it.' 'What'll happen to them?' said Ron eagerly. 'Well, put it this way,' said Hermione, 'it'll make Eloise Midgeon's acne look like a couple of cute freckles.' ******************** This is also why Hermione didn't tell the people who signed the parchment about the jinx. Had she done so, the potential sneak would be warned and could attempt a counterjinx before the actual treason. I would also add that strong magic in the Potterverse frequently takes its power from a deeply moral (or immoral) choice. For example, the Secret Keeper spell takes its power from the Keeper's decision not to betray friends, and the Unforgivables take their power from someone's resolve to cause harm. I think it is safe to assume that the sneak jinx was so powerful because the jinxed party had taken a choice to sign a statement that she won't do what she actually did. It was Marietta's own signature that gave the power to the jinx. Moral or not, this is of course for each of us to decide, but looking back at the plot of OotP, it seems a pity that DD didn't make all the Order members and Kreacher sign a similar parchment. Not only Kreacher, but also Podmore would have been found before they could have caused any harm. IMHO, Hermione's real mistake here was leaving the parchment in a place where Umbridge could find it if she find the Room of Requirement. She should have hidden that parchment somewhere safe. Granted, it was a mistake shared by Harry and everybody in the DA, but Hermione was more responsible for it because she had personally promised Ernie she won't leave it where Umbridge can find it, and she did just that. IMO this was Hermione's biggest mistake in OotP, a mistake that proved critical even more than Marietta's sneaking. Perhaps this is JKR's poetic justice at work: because of Hermione's lake of judgement, her parchment framed the only person in it who has never signed it - Dumbledore. Neri From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 31 15:08:43 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 15:08:43 -0000 Subject: Marietta and Hermione (was JKR's Messages ) (was Re: Hermione In Trouble?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120838 Del replies: Let me re-quote the first episode, at the beginning of the meeting: "Cho had just smiled at him and sat down on Ron's right. Her friend, who had curly reddish-blonde hair, did not smile, but gave Harry a thoroughly mistrustful look which plainly told him that, given her way, she would not be here at all". Notice the "given her way". Marrietta would not have been here if Cho hadn't insisted, even Harry realises that. Moreover, as I already said, when she accepted to come, Marrietta didn't know what the DA would *really* be about. She might not have been enthusiastic about a not-forbidden DADA practice group, but an illegal anti-Umbridge group was another matter entirely! Alla: As I said the first time - nice quote. Just for the fun of it, let me play "unreliable narrator" argument, which played so often in Harry/Snape discussions. :o) Tell me if it sounds convincing or not. So, what does Harry REALLY knows about Marietta? In this quote he looks at her and sees Marietta making unhappy face, right? She does not even speak. Did Harry ever talk to her? Not that I remember. Could Marietta pretend to be unhappy? I'd say yes, if she indeed was put to it by her mother and she wanted to spy on what Harry was up to. What I am getting at? Oh, yes - that Harry may have read Marietta incorrectly and she could have been a good enough actor to pul it off fooling Cho and making her believe that she is coming to DA meeetings only for her friend sake. Do I really believe in Spy!Marietta? Nope, just wanted to try and make an argument about it, because on a bit more serious note Pettigrew was also a quiet one and SUPPOSEDLY following his friends and doing what THEY wanted. Del replies: That's another conspiracy theory to explain in a complicated way something that has a very simple explanation : Marrietta never wanted to belong to the DA, but she followed Cho because she is her friend. Just like Ron and Hermione follow Harry sometimes even when they really don't want to. Alla: Oh, NO. I don't build conspiracy theories, Del. I usually prefer simple explanations. I think I clearly stated in my previous post that it was just a speculation, nothing more. :o) Alla wrote previously: "Then my only advise to her will be to open her eyes and grow up." Del replies: Open her eyes to what? Something that only Harry saw? Grow up? Isn't that *exactly* what she did, by not going with the group, and doing what she thought was right? Alla: Del, again, I don't believe in absolute relativism of the morals. I believe she needs to open her eyes and see who the good guys really are and the fact that she did what SHE thought was right does NOT make it right, in my opinion. P.S. I pretty much agree with Nora's posts about Marietta situation. What's new here? :o) Happy 2005 to you and your family and to everybody on the list. From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Fri Dec 31 15:26:09 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 15:26:09 -0000 Subject: Punishing Marietta In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120839 Nora wrote: "Marietta ... also failed to keep trust in those who kept trust in her," Del replies: Just to nitpick : whatever she did, she was *bound* to do that, because she had 2 different sets of people expecting diametrically opposite things from her. On one side her parents had made her promise not to do anything against Umbridge, and on the other side Cho and the DA expected her to approve of and even participate in a self-proclaimed anti-Umbridge organisation. Nora wrote: " Rowling's Big'n'Obvious Point in OotP is that Authority does not always do the right things and should not be followed blindly--no, it is practically a moral imperative to deny it at times. A point with a fine and long tradition in political theory, of course." Del replies: Agreed, but we're talking about very young people here (Percy and Marrietta), who have a vague understanding of politics and morality. They are in the process of developing their own morality out of the familial and social moralities they are presented with. They are *bound* to make mistakes, but they shouldn't be eternally condemned or called evil because of those mistakes IMO. Neri wrote: "I think it is safe to assume that the sneak jinx was so powerful because the jinxed party had taken a choice to sign a statement that she won't do what she actually did. It was Marietta's own signature that gave the power to the jinx." Del replies: I would agree, if things had been that clear when they signed. My problem is that what they signed was supposed to be simply a list of who was there at the first meeting, but Hermione added on to it the condition that whoever signed agreed not to tell. She muddied the issue, and that's where I disagree with her. Let's say I was there at that meeting, but as I discovered the reality of what those kids wanted to do, I decided I didn't want to be a part of it. What should I do concerning the parchment? If I sign it just because I'm there, I'm agreeing not to tell anything to anyone, even after the group became illegal, and even if I start having real concerns about it, especially considering that one of my best friends is involved in it. Now let's say that I'm completely enthusiastic about the group, but I really really don't want to risk, say, my parents discovering about it. Ernie might think that Hermione's word of keeping the list secret is enough, but I don't agree with him. What should I do? If I don't sign it, then I automatically become suspect by not wanting to admit I was even there, even if in fact I'm enthusiastic about the group and all I want is to avoid any risk of anyone ever discovering what I'm up to. By using a single parchment to make 2 different statements (presence and secret), Hermione muddied the implicit promise, which makes this promise invalid in my eyes, since there's no way to know if the kids signed just to say they were there or also to promise. Del From dontask2much at yahoo.com Fri Dec 31 15:26:23 2004 From: dontask2much at yahoo.com (charme) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 10:26:23 -0500 Subject: Come out Petunia (long) Message-ID: <007701c4ef4d$167eb760$6601a8c0@MITRE.ORG> No: HPFGUIDX 120840 I have, like many of you, a list of questions I keep in mind when I re-read the books or research quotes, interviews and other editorials online and one of them is about Petunia. I keep asking myself what the deal is with Petunia: there's a bit more to Petunia, JKR says, but she's a Muggle? The question of Petunia's relationship to Lily has been called into question on this list many times: is Petunia *really* Lily's sister? Is she really a Muggle? Is she a latent Witch? Is she just a cruel twit who was jealous of her sister and displaces all her anger and fears of magic on Harry? Notice most of these questions come after it's been revealed in CoS what Lily "looks like," as there are no pictures of the Potters in the Dursley household when the septology starts. (PS/SS) There are then references to the Petunia's facial characteristics: blonde hair, long horsey face, and pale eyes which almost lead the reader wonder how in hell Lily & Petunia could be sisters, such as: OoP/US/pg 38: "Her large pale eyes (so unlike her sister's) were not narrowed in dislike or anger:...." So unlike her sister's, huh? Well, I have a theory: perhaps Petunia is a Metamorphmagus. Some of you probably think that might be too far farfected, however I believe Tonks' explanation in OoP and her clumsiness are a clues we shouldn't ignore: OoP/US/pg 52: "Well, you'll have to learn the hard way, I'm afraid," said Tonks. "Metamorphmagi are really rare, they're born, not made." As Tonks is admittedly dead clumsy and her spell and charmwork appears not overwhelmingly terrific; this might lead one to believe as a Metamorphmagus, her other magical capabilities might be quite diminished compared to other wizards who were not born Metamorphmagi. Perhaps the only thing Petunia can or could do is change some of her appearance, not to the level Tonks can, but enough to avoid drawing attention to herself as Lily's sister - why, you say, would she do that? Would you want the DE's to easily be able to spot you as Lily's sister before and after LV's demise at GH if you knew how dangerous LV was in his heyday? Petunia appears to know more about the WW and the implications of LV's return in OoP that we previously knew prior as evident in her revelation about what Dementors are and her reaction to Harry's explanation that he saw LV return. We could surmise that Petunia could still be a Muggle if the only ability she has (at present, maybe) is a Metamorphmagus capability on a limited scale. One other footnote to this theory exists in PS/SS, US, pg 24: "Next morning, however, he had gotten up to find his hair exactly as it had been before Aunt Petunia had sheared it off. He had been given a week in his cupboard for this, even though he tried to explain how he couldn't explain how it had grown back so quickly." Interestingly, there's another passage earlier in PS/SS that states about once a week, Vernon would say Harry needed a haircut and when Harry did go to the barber, it wouldn't help - his hair just stood up all over the place and that's the way it grew. Then Petunia takes matters into her own hands? I think Petunia believed Harry could control his hair growing back - why else would *she* (individually without Vernon) specifically banish him to his cupboard for it afterwards unless she believed he could control his Metamorphmagus abilities as she did herself? I can think of only 2 times where Petunia alone banishes Harry to the cupboard or his room: once for his hair growing back, and then again in OoP. If what we're seeing here is true, Petunia may have *first hand knowledge* of Metamorphmagus abilities. Only JKR knows and it's apparent we don't have the full story about Petunia yet. :) I can't wait til we do.... charme From foxmoth at qnet.com Fri Dec 31 15:36:48 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 15:36:48 -0000 Subject: Marietta and Hermione (was JKR's Messages ) (was Re: Hermione In Trouble?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120841 > > Del replies: > Agreed. But the question is : who was the traitor in Marrietta's > eyes? If she didn't believe Harry's conspiracy theories about LV > being back,wouldn't she also believe that Harry was the traitor to > the government, to his country and people? > > > Alla: > > Then my only advise to her will be to open her eyes and grow up. Sorry for such categorical statement. > Pippin: Open her eyes to what? There was no independent evidence on which Marietta could base her decision. She's not a legilimens, who can tell when people are lying just by looking at them, and an honest answer to the question, "Has Harry Potter ever lied before?" would not be "No." Dumbledore believes Harry, but it's not like he's never been fooled before, either. The way I see it, Marietta didn't have any choice but to be a traitor. She would be a traitor in her mother's eyes if she went to the meetings, and a traitor in Cho's eyes if she didn't. A more grown-up, independent minded person might have been able to say to Cho, "Look, you're a great friend and I'd be sorry to lose you, and I wish I knew how to tell you that you aren't being a good friend by putting me in this position. I'm not the kind of person who can lie to my Mum and feel good about it. Sorry." But I know a lot of people who wouldn't have the nerve to say that, and some of them are a lot older than sixteen. Hermione's hex wouldn't have stopped a real, fanatical Ministry supporter from telling Umbridge everything-- if you became a spy to save your country, would you let a case of acne stop you? In any case, Hermione's stated aim was to make the traitor sorry, not stop them from betraying, and there again, a reluctant traitor would already be sorry, while a fanatical traitor wouldn't be sorry no matter what the curse did. Maybe Machiavellian is a better word than tyrannical to describe Hermione's methods. But if those are the methods JKR approves, then why aren't the Slytherins the heroes of the books? Pippin From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Fri Dec 31 15:49:35 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 15:49:35 -0000 Subject: JKR's Messages (was Re: Hermione In Trouble?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120842 > Nora wrote: > My personal parsing is that, in JKR's world, I suspect that some > people are more inclined to do what is good, and some inclined to do > what is evil. Those essences are affected by upbringing, but their > manifestation into the world is a case of choice on the part of the > person. Draco, for instance, is naturally inclined to be selfish and > jealous, and his choices as manifested in his actions show us this. > Snape is naturally inclined to be god-knows-what...forget I mentioned > him. Pointless to argue about a character who none of us really > understand. Harry is naturally inclined to be a good person, and at > times has to struggle to make the choices that correspond. Compared > to Draco, perhaps it's that Draco is unwilling to invest the effort? > > Let's not talk about free will. Please. :) Neri: Well, if we DO choose to argue about free will in a story, we should differentiate very clearly between the plot level and the author's intentions level. In the author's intensions level (I leave it to Carol and Nora to supply the exact terms) no character in the story has free will. They all do what the author makes them do, so if she decides that Harry is good and Malfoy is bad, then these are the "choices" she will make them take. But within the story, there's no need to assume that someone is innately good or innately evil. As long as they are persons, they have free will. Some of them chose to do good and some of them chose to do evil. Assuming they were innately bent on good or evil discredit their free will and thus their personhood. So I'm sure that the trio will generally make the good choices because in the level of the author's intensions they are obviously the good heroes of the story. But I still maintain that within the story, to assume that they are innately good is to discredit their personhood. I know this sounds like a paradox, but it's not my fault. It is the built-in paradox of fiction. A "character" from outside the story is a "person" within the story. Neri From nrenka at yahoo.com Fri Dec 31 15:50:31 2004 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 15:50:31 -0000 Subject: Marietta and Hermione (JKR's Messages ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120843 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > Pippin: > Maybe Machiavellian is a better word than tyrannical to describe > Hermione's methods. But if those are the methods JKR > approves, then why aren't the Slytherins the heroes of the > books? In short: context and motivation. JKR isn't a strict Kantian, where means are categorically (hee!) more important than the ends. Hermione's mistakes are, perhaps, a warning that one can slide over the edge when using any means to achieve your ends; but I suspect that the ends still rule over most things, in the implicit morality of the Potterverse. Genuinely good intentions and a tough situation can produce results that are not exactly optimal, but it's still different coming from Hermione than coming from Draco or Umbridge, no? This hearkens back to one of the so-far interesting critical issues in the books: JKR has done a better job giving us good characters who are conflicted and have to do complex things than in showing us the true vileness of what they're struggling against. I've seen enough arguments about the 'essential moral equivalency' of Draco and Harry, the Trio and the Slytherins, Dumbledore and Voldemort, to send me heading for the toilet. But maybe our few resident FEATHERBOAS will get lucky, next book. -Nora is really gone now, really From jolka55 at poczta.onet.pl Fri Dec 31 15:56:37 2004 From: jolka55 at poczta.onet.pl (Julia) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 15:56:37 -0000 Subject: What's going on with Remus? (was: Remus and Sibyll sitting in a tree) In-Reply-To: <12c.5437906c.2f063461@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120844 > Chancie: > > I don't know if I think Lupin feels "guilty" because he killed someone or > maybe > its just the fact that he blamed Sirius for James's death. He thought Peter > was dead, and maybe he felt as though he should have done something to > stop it. Then felt guilty because when he learned Sirius was innocent, that > he blamed him in the first place. Do we know if Lupin really had any other > friends other than the Marauders? Maybe he felt he couldn't really be > friends > with others for fear of killing them durring the full moon. After he left > Hogwarts > I doubt he had a safe place for his transformations like the Shreeking Shack > provided. I guess what I'm trying to say is that maybe his guilty feelings > are > just because he feels responsible for the deaths of the others. Like Harry > felt > for Sirius's. That maybe if I had done something diffrent my friends would > still > be alive. > Julia here: I don't know if it is possible but when it comes to warewolves in Britain I think that there have to be more than one. And maybe Remus knows a couple of people like him? And maybe he transforms with them so that they are not so dangerous to normal people - just like when he was with marauders! When thinking about it I wonder who makes now the Potion for Remus... is it still Snape or there are other people who can manage it? What about others like Lupin? Will we meet other werewolves in the books? How do they live? Considering Remus' feeling of guilt... I think it is really possible that he could have killed someone in the past ... and i think that even if it wasn't someone from the Order Lupin would still feel extremely guilty about it... But I must say that I haven't seen anything in his behaviour which would tell me that he really has some kind of terrifying secret... maybe I have to re-read POA? Julia From foxmoth at qnet.com Fri Dec 31 15:57:56 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 15:57:56 -0000 Subject: Umbridge and Hermione was Marrieta and ... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120845 Eggplant: > > I don't think definitions are very important in everyday > life unless you're dealing in mathematics or formal logic, > examples are far far more important, but if pressed I > suppose I'd say a good organization is one that does > mostly good and a evil organization is one that > does mostly evil. It works for me anyway. > Pippin: Thanks for clarifying, Eggplant. Would you agree that the centaurs had become an evil organization by embracing racism, and that Hermione should have realized that? She had a good half an hour, walking into the forest, to come up with a better plan, and I could come up with half a dozen better plans in that time...trip over a root and pretend to break my ankle, say that the weapon must have been moved to London and flee up the steps of Grimmauld Place when Umbridge took them there, Grawp, the merpeople, asking Harry to call Fawkes, Dobby (that one deserves all caps), -- there are a lot of creatures who would have helped Harry out of kindness or loyalty to Dumbledore. What Hermione did, IMO, was the equivalent of trying to get the KKK to help her deal with a corrupt, evil, black person. It'd serve her right if they tried to lynch her too, and isn't that what happened? Don't worry about Hermione's comeuppance -- she got it already. Pippin From norek_archives2 at hotmail.com Fri Dec 31 16:06:48 2004 From: norek_archives2 at hotmail.com (Janet Anderson) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 16:06:48 +0000 Subject: Moon orb? (was Remus, Sibyl and a lot of other stuff) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120846 >Potioncat: >Someone else came up with the idea, oh, over a year ago, that Lupin's >boggart was a prophecy orb, not a moon. The more I argued against >prophecy orb, the less convinced I became with the "moon" as boggart. >It's Lupin, after all who tells us it's a moon. It's never described >as a moon. I started re-reading PS/SS last night, and I noticed something: when Harry arrives in Diagon Alley for the first time and is looking at the things for sale in the shops, one of the things he sees is "moon orbs." No details, just the name. Maybe a moon orb is the same as a crystal ball, or maybe it's astronomical equipment, or maybe it's just something JKR put in for atmosphere. Or maybe not. Janet Anderson From eggplant9998 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 31 16:07:30 2004 From: eggplant9998 at yahoo.com (eggplant9998) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 16:07:30 -0000 Subject: Marietta and Hermione (was JKR's Messages ) (was Re: Hermione In Trouble?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120847 "delwynmarch" wrote: > And yet somehow Marrietta is evil > for being wrong in her judgement? Exactly. Bad moral judgment is the very definition of evil, if you really need a definition for such a thing. > How do you know that she didn't do exactly > what you describe : use her human judgement > and do the best she could? She very well may have done so, but in this case the best she could was not nearly good enough and when you make a moral miscalculation of that magnitude you can expect negative repercussions. Call me crazy but I just don't like people who make bad moral judgments, not ones that big anyway. > What made the DA a good organisation according > to that definition, in the eyes of someone > who did not believe that LV was back? I'm not interested in this "in the eyes of" stuff, the fact is that Voldemort HAS returned and if a person does not believe it then that person is WRONG. Wrong is not good. > Did she give them a choice? Yes, she gave them a choice, and BEFORE anybody signed anything she warned them what it would mean, I quote from page 346: "If you sign you're agreeing not to tell Umbridge or anybody else what we're up to." If you kept your word the hex made no difference and if you didn't then you I don't much care what happens to you. > He or anybody else couldn't wiggle out > of that one without looking bad. Yes, if Ernie had not signed he would have been perceived by the others as a sniveling spineless coward, and I believe that perception would have been exactly correct; it would have been a classic example of choosing what is easy over what is right. Fortunately in the end Ernie made the correct decision, probably helped by Hermione's inspiring words. > I don't care what JKR says *about* the books, > I care what she says *in* the books. And in > the books there was no official and public > declaration of war. Take a look at chapter 38, you know the one I'm talking about, the one titled "The Second War Begins". > The WW owed Harry gratitude for somehow > ridding them of LV 14 years ago. But > Harry didn't do it *on purpose* What about the time he stopped Voldemort's plans when he was 11? What about the time he stopped Voldemort's plans when he was 12? What about the time when he was 14 and magically arm wrestled with Voldemort and won? And yet even after all that some people think Umbridge is more trustworthy than Harry, that is a bad moral judgment, a very very bad moral judgment. > Harry could watch Cho cry without feeling moved I too lost all sympathy Cho when she was sticking up for Marrietta even after her treachery and betrayal. Eggplant From dontask2much at yahoo.com Fri Dec 31 16:08:38 2004 From: dontask2much at yahoo.com (charme) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 11:08:38 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Marietta and Hermione (was JKR's Messages ) (was Re: Hermione In Trouble?) References: Message-ID: <00d301c4ef52$fd99d350$6601a8c0@MITRE.ORG> No: HPFGUIDX 120848 > Del replies: > Let me re-quote the first episode, at the beginning of the meeting: > "Cho had just smiled at him and sat down on Ron's right. Her friend, > who had curly reddish-blonde hair, did not smile, but gave Harry a > thoroughly mistrustful look which plainly told him that, given her > way, she would not be here at all". > > Notice the "given her way". Marrietta would not have been here if Cho > hadn't insisted, even Harry realises that. Moreover, as I already > said, when she accepted to come, Marrietta didn't know what the DA > would *really* be about. She might not have been enthusiastic about a > not-forbidden DADA practice group, but an illegal anti-Umbridge group > was another matter entirely! > > charme: Cho insisted, so Marietta just blindly followed? If I take your post above and your quotes from the beginning of the meeting, this leads me to believe that Marietta had some sense what the group was about prior, had doubts about it prior, and *went anyway to follow Cho's lead.* If I play devil's advocate the way you are Del, why would a teenager go against her inner voice which said "don't do this, bad idea?" Marietta had a choice and she chose to go, and chose to reveal the group. If we go back to DD's statement in CoS it's all about the choices we make, isn't it? And the substance or basis of the septology JKR's created has to do with making the right choice, not the easy one, correct? If we go along those lines the logical right choice would have been for Marietta to say no to Cho and not go at all. Hence avoiding the outcome and depriving us of the the story, and this discussion. :) Hermoine's charm on the contract symbolizes (note I say symbolizes - I am not arguing moralities with anyone as I feel that is inappropriate, too personal and only results in flame wars on this messageboard.) to me the uncontrollable consequences of the choices we make: for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction, even if we don't know what the reaction will be or where the downstream effect will reach and if the reaction is just or unjust. charme From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Fri Dec 31 16:23:57 2004 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 16:23:57 -0000 Subject: Punishing Marietta In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120849 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nkafkafi" wrote: > > IMHO, Hermione's real mistake here was leaving the parchment in a > place where Umbridge could find it if she find the Room of > Requirement. She should have hidden that parchment somewhere safe. Hickengruendler: I'm not sure. The whole scene was a bit unclear for me, but I think Hermione didn't leave the parchment in the RoR. Umbridge said, that she needed some evidence, and that the room provided the evidence. To me, that sounds as if the parchment appeared in the room, because Umbridge asked for it. After all, it was the Room of Requirement. Hickengruendler From miamibarb at BellSouth.net Fri Dec 31 16:31:10 2004 From: miamibarb at BellSouth.net (Barb Roberts) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 11:31:10 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Punishing Marietta In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <61158865-5B49-11D9-9C33-000A95DC8A32@bellsouth.net> No: HPFGUIDX 120850 > Lupinlore wrote: > "Or, to paraphrase James Clavell, "Their is absolutely no excuse for > defying legally constituted authority -- unless of course you win.? If > you win everything is all right." What? A pithy statement, but really...but it's a caustic put down of an ancient debate. I also think this is an argument that could easily get off canon. Many wars, many causes have been fought because people argued that a higher authority or at least a universal moral principal exist which has more importance than the current civil authority. Before the US Civil War, northern abolitionists based their cause on a higher law. The constituted authority declared slavery to be legal in the Southern states and that runaway slaves must be returned to their rightful owners. The abolitionists, however, pointed to the principals of a higher law. And it was controversial then. Very. And yes, the northern abolitionists *eventually* won, but it took almost a generation of time for them to win, and But if the abolitionists had lost would they really believe that there was no excuse for freeing the slaves or operating the underground railroad? Of course not. Hermione definitely comes from the school of thought that one should obey the higher law or principals over merely the legally constituted authority. This is a basic part of her character. All her SPEW activities prove it. She is a house-elf abolitionist. Whatever one thinks of her activities, Hermione would think that it is wrong not to resist the authorities whom she sees as disobeying higher, universal principles. And of course, anyone, Hermione or Marietta, if caught, will be penalized for disobeying any kind of authority--legal, or in Marietta's case, underground. This is going to be difficult to explain clearly and simply. The world of Harry Potter operates in many of the same ways our world does, but there is a sense in which JKR personifies and/or shows in a tangible way things that happen in our world when she writes about them. For instance, I am sure that many teachers think that there is a spirit of Peeves operating in their school. Of course, Peeves physically exists at Hogwarts. Likewise Marietta, in real life, would have been figuratively branded a traitor by being shunned etc. JKR just makes it more real in her world. Barbara Roberts [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Fri Dec 31 16:35:32 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 16:35:32 -0000 Subject: Marietta and Hermione (was JKR's Messages ) (was Re: Hermione In Trouble?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120851 Eggplant wrote: "Bad moral judgment is the very definition of evil, if you really need a definition for such a thing." Del replies: So a little kid who makes fun of another because he is fat/of a different colour/handicapped/ugly/whatever is evil? Interesting. I guess you find *everyone* evil then, because *everyone* I know made a bad moral judgement one day or the other. Eggplant wrote: "She very well may have done so, but in this case the best she could was not nearly good enough and when you make a moral miscalculation of that magnitude you can expect negative repercussions. Call me crazy but I just don't like people who make bad moral judgments, not ones that big anyway. " Del replies: You mean "the best she could was not nearly good enough FOR YOU". You're constantly mixing up facts, opinions and preferences. For example, from what you said above, I deduce that one reason you think Marrietta evil is because you don't like the mistake she made. Basically what you're saying is "what I like is right and good and what I don't like is evil and wrong", which prompts me to ask : are you a god? Eggplant wrote: "I'm not interested in this "in the eyes of" stuff, the fact is that Voldemort HAS returned and if a person does not believe it then that person is WRONG. Wrong is not good." Del replies: If wrong is not good, then nobody, whether in RL or in the Potterverse, is good, everybody is evil, because everybody has been wrong at least once in their life. Is that what you're saying? Eggplant wrote: "Yes, if Ernie had not signed he would have been perceived by the others as a sniveling spineless coward, and I believe that perception would have been exactly correct; it would have been a classic example of choosing what is easy over what is right. Fortunately in the end Ernie made the correct decision, probably helped by Hermione's inspiring words. " Del replies: He made the right decision ACCORDING TO YOU. In my idea, if he or anyone else didn't *mean* to promise not to say anything, then signing that paper was a very wrong decision. I, Del, wrote: "I don't care what JKR says *about* the books, I care what she says *in* the books. And in the books there was no official and public declaration of war. " Eggplant answered: "Take a look at chapter 38, you know the one I'm talking about, the one titled "The Second War Begins"." Del replies: You mean the LAST chapter of OoP? Oh, I get it : not only are characters in a book supposed to know that they are characters in a book and who the hero of the book is, but they must also know what will happen at the end of the book... In fact, the very fact that you pointed proves that I was right : if JKR titled the LAST chapter of OoP "The Second War Begins", then it means that there was NO LV war going on during the rest of the book. Eggplant wrote: "What about the time he stopped Voldemort's plans when he was 11?" Del replies: What do people know about that? Is there any other witness to this than Harry? Eggplant wrote: "What about the time he stopped Voldemort's plans when he was 12? " Del replies: What do people know about that? Is there any other witness to this than Harry? Eggplant wrote: "What about the time when he was 14 and magically arm wrestled with Voldemort and won?" Del replies: Is there any other witness to this than Harry? Do you really expect everyone to believe the word of a single teenage boy? Eggplant wrote: "I too lost all sympathy Cho when she was sticking up for Marrietta even after her treachery and betrayal." Del replies: You're mixing the timeline up again. Harry wasn't moved by Cho's tears long *before* the Marrietta Problem happened. Del From mcdee1980 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 31 16:50:10 2004 From: mcdee1980 at yahoo.com (mcdee1980) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 16:50:10 -0000 Subject: JKR's Messages (was Re: Hermione In Trouble?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120852 > Carol: > I don't know about either of you, but I'm bothered by the word > "innate," which suggests that their goodness is inborn--a concept very > much at odds with the idea of choice. If they're innately good, they > can make mistakes (and they do), but they can't become evil. In > contrast, Tom Riddle, who unquestionably is or becomes evil, cannot be > innately good. Is he evil by his own choice, a choice denied the > "innately good" Trio, or is he innately evil, in which case his > choices were preordained and not choices at all? If *some* people are > innately good, why wouldn't *all* people be? Surely good and evil are > meaningful concepts only if those who choose them do so knowingly and >willingly? Lady McBeth: The concept of innate goodness and innate evil is almost impossible to tackle. I don't think there is a right answer here. Its the same as trying to prove the existence of good using Aquinas's model of all goodness. Aquinas states that if there is good in the world there must be an example of something that is all good (or innately good)and all powerful, however, if you follow that proof if there is evil there must be something that is all evil and all powerful. It is impossible for there to be two all powerful beings in the world at the same time . . . and here we are back at the prophecy! If LV represents that which is all evil and Harry Represents that which is all good they cannot exist together. One must be false and the other must triumh over iit. Lady McBeth, Please excuse my lack of formatting, my keyboard is ccurrently without an enter key and i can't fix it. From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Fri Dec 31 16:55:20 2004 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 16:55:20 -0000 Subject: Umbridge and Hermione was Marrieta and ... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120853 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > > Pippin: > > She [Hermione] had a good half an hour, walking into the forest, to come up > with a better plan, and I could come up with half a dozen better > plans in that time...trip over a root and pretend to break my ankle, > say that the weapon must have been moved to London and flee > up the steps of Grimmauld Place when Umbridge took them > there, Grawp, the merpeople, asking Harry to call Fawkes, Dobby > (that one deserves all caps), -- there are a lot of creatures who > would have helped Harry out of kindness or loyalty to > Dumbledore. > Hickengruendler: Well, I still think Grawp was not really a possibility. He could have smashed everybody. From what Hermione has seen of them, Grawp was much more dangerous, than the centaurs. And I'm also not sure, how the merpeople could have helped. You have some point with the other possibilities, especially Dobby, however, the whole situation was still a race against time. Hermione thought Sirius to be in danger, there was no time to change the plan several times. I think it is just fair to give Hermione some credit for trying to safe Harry and Sirius in this scene, after all, the others didn't seem to think about any way out of this situation at all. Pippin: > What Hermione did, IMO, was the equivalent of trying to get the > KKK to help her deal with a corrupt, evil, black person. Hickengruendler: Really? Could Hermione really have known that the centaurs are that dangerous? Of course, they didn't seem to be exactly the friends of the wizards, and they threatened Hagrid, but it's not that they came galopping out of the forest to attack some prejudiced wizards or Ministry of Magic employ?es on a regular basis. And Hermione tried to warn Umbridge not to insult the centaurs. I don't know if she really meant it or if she really cared (probably not), but she warned her. But in the end Umbridge was not only attacked because she was simply there, but also because she insulted the centaurs and because she was the first to attack. It was only after she hexed Magorian, that the centaurs stroke back. Neither of this is Hermione's fault. > It'd serve > her right if they tried to lynch her too, and isn't that what > happened? Don't worry about Hermione's comeuppance -- she > got it already. > > Pippin Hickengruendler: That's another point, and thank you for mentioning it. Hermione got some negative results of her actions. She misjudged the centaurs and she realized it. It's completely unimportant if Grawp saved them (the whole Grawp character is so far nothing but a plot device anyway), Hermione's misjudgement brought her into a danger. I think that and Luna proving to be a good friend and valuable help will open Hermione's eyes a bit and make her realize, that her point of view is not the only correct one. Hickengruendler, who still hopes that SPEW will have some success, though. From norek_archives2 at hotmail.com Fri Dec 31 16:59:34 2004 From: norek_archives2 at hotmail.com (Janet Anderson) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 16:59:34 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Punishing Marietta In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120854 Neri said: >Hermione's jinx wasn't designed against Marietta personally. It was >designed to warn the DA that they have a traitor in their midst. ...and to let them know who it was. Dumbledore's Army has a lot of problems, but one thing they will not have: the knowledge that an *unknown* traitor was in their midst, with the resulting fear and distrust of each other. We all know how much trouble this caused in the first Order. What would have happened if Dumbledore had used such a device when recruiting for the first Order? Harry might still have parents. Sirius might not have ended up in Azkaban. Molly's brothers, and the other Order members who were "picked off one by one," might have survived. Remember, Marietta *chose* to become a traitor. She could have left Dumbledore's Army and not said anything. Choices. Very important. Her choices weren't in any way restricted or dictated by the hexed parchment, before or after she went to Umbridge -- it merely let the other people who would be affected by her choices know what she had chosen. Doesn't Dumbledore say that it's our choices that *show* what we are? Happy New Year, Janet Anderson From jolka55 at poczta.onet.pl Fri Dec 31 17:22:05 2004 From: jolka55 at poczta.onet.pl (Julia) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 17:22:05 -0000 Subject: Moon orb? (was Remus, Sibyl and a lot of other stuff) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120855 >Potioncat: >Someone else came up with the idea, oh, over a year ago, that Lupin's boggart was a prophecy orb, not a moon. The more I argued against prophecy orb, the less convinced I became with the "moon" as boggart.It's Lupin, after all who tells us it's a moon. It's never described as a moon. > Julia here: You know, while reading the posts about Lupin's boggart I thought it can't be nothing else but moon too. But know I'm almost sure that it can't be moon. Why? (apart from the fact that I can't understand why he should be afraid of the moon... after so long it should be a normal thing in his life...) I was surprised that no one has came up with it yet (or maybe someone has?) The orb which we see in a scene in PoA can't be moon because it doesn't affect Lupin in a way real moon affects him. According to Harry's boggart - Dementor, it (boggart) behaves in the same way as the real one. When Harry sees his boggart he can feel as if the real Dementor was approaching. He hears the voices in his head and so on... So why Lupin's boggart doesn't affect Lupin? Why he doesn't change into a werewolf? It'd seem logical after all... To me now it's obvious that Lupin's boggart isn't the moon. It simply can't(as far as JKR didn't make a mistake). Now I'm questioning myself... is it really the crystal ball? Julia From Vivamus at TaprootTech.com Fri Dec 31 17:25:26 2004 From: Vivamus at TaprootTech.com (Vivamus) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 12:25:26 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Come out Petunia (long) In-Reply-To: <007701c4ef4d$167eb760$6601a8c0@MITRE.ORG> Message-ID: <200412311226604.SM01044@devbox> No: HPFGUIDX 120856 > charme: > > I keep asking myself what the deal is with > Petunia: there's a bit more to Petunia, JKR says, but she's a > Muggle? The question of Petunia's relationship to Lily has > been called into question on this list many times: is > Petunia *really* Lily's sister? Is she really a Muggle? Is > she a latent Witch? Is she just a cruel twit who was jealous > of her sister and displaces all her anger and fears of magic on Harry? Vivamus: Whatever else she is -- and I agree with you that these are fascinating questions -- she must be Lilly's sister, or the blood protection would not work. > Notice most of these questions come after it's been revealed > in CoS what Lily "looks like," as there are no pictures of > the Potters in the Dursley household when the septology > starts. (PS/SS) There are then references to the Petunia's > facial characteristics: blonde hair, long horsey face, and > pale eyes which almost lead the reader wonder how in hell > Lily & Petunia could be sisters, such as: > > OoP/US/pg 38: "Her large pale eyes (so unlike her sister's) > were not narrowed in dislike or anger:...." > > So unlike her sister's, huh? Well, I have a theory: perhaps > Petunia is a Metamorphmagus. Vivamus: While I like the idea, there is one small and one really gaping hole in it. The small hole is that I think metamorphmagi being really rare makes it pretty far-fetched that Lilly's sister would be one -- unless, as you suggest, BOTH Petunia and Harry are metamorphmagi. The gaping hole is the description of Petunia as being ugly. The idea that a woman who could choose her own appearance would permanently choose ugliness is pretty hard to swallow. She very well may not want to be so curvey that she has men falling all over her, but I doubt that any woman born would choose to have an ugly face, if she had a choice about it. > Only JKR knows and it's apparent we don't have the full story > about Petunia yet. :) I can't wait til we do.... > > charme Vivamus: Me, too. From silvanaroven at yahoo.de Fri Dec 31 10:11:01 2004 From: silvanaroven at yahoo.de (Silvana Roven) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 11:11:01 +0100 Subject: The Veil, HP & LOTR Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120857 Silvana: >> I like to compare the characters JKR develops with >> Tolkien's LOTR. >> JKR herself once stated writing her books she was >> inspired by Tolkien's work. >> >> I made up some ideas of who might be who, but I had >> doubts about who is Aragorn. >> I admit that I thought of Ron because of the >> Quidditch-jingle "Weasley is our king". >> But it didn't fit that good - Ron seems more to be Sam. >> GEO: > Agreed Ron does fit the Sam analogue quite well. > > As for the Aragorn analogue, it's Harry of course. > Silvana: I see your point. But I still tend to see Harry as being Frodo. It is Harry who has to defeat the Dark Lord. Frodo does it by destroying the ring. And from what DD said and from the story itself we've learned that (corporal) death is not really a threat to LV. So it must be some other way to destroy the heir of Slytherin... Frodo inherited the One Ring from his uncle Bilbo who was like a father to him. Harry has only one thing, he has inherited from his father: the INVISIBILITY cloak... AND I dislike your comparison of the Elves to the Dursleys. In my opinion this family is like ORCS!!! *lol* How about this: Sirius is from a dark wizard family (all of them in Slytherin-House) but he grew up like a brother to James Potter, he was in Gryffindor-House and preferred the Potters' place. GEO: > Sirius is more of a Boromir analogue since both the > first men to fall in their respective stories and > are both portrayed as somewhat rash. > Silvana: Yes, he is the first man to fall... on the "side of the light". The first one JKR killed was Quirrel. And Quirrel has been tempted by Voldemort's power - as was Boromir. GEO: > He has little resemblance with Aragorn besides the > fact that the movie characters look alike. > Silvana: ;-) Both didn't want to enter upon the inheritance of their ancestors... Silvana: >> Rubeus Hagrid = Treebeard >> GEO: > How about Radagast the Brown. I always thought that > Hagrid was more like him than Treebeard. > Silvana: Radaghast the Brown? Help me with this one, please. Who was it? I imagined Hagrid as Treebeard because he is half giant and he was looking for the giants to join DD's side. It looks to me like Fangorn walking towards Saruman. But maybe Treebeard would fit better to Firenze's part... Perhaps the centaur is able to persuade his former comrades to fight the dark side... Geoff: > I can see GEO's argument for Harry=Aragorn from the > comparisons made but again, Harry/Ron do compare > well with Frodo/Sam. > > Harry also has to go forward and face perils on his > own - the Basilisk for example as Frodo has to face > Shelob. Agreed, the outcomes are not arrived at in > quite the same way but there are similarities. > Silvana: I totally agree! And the graveyard scene in GoF - where Wormtail takes some of Harry's blood - could be compared to the scene when Frodo gets injured by the dark blade on the way to Rivendell. (I can't remember the name of this location at the moment, sorry.) Silvana: >>> Peter Pettigrew (Wormtail) = Wormtongue GEO: >> Peter Pettigrew is NOT an analogue for Wormtongue. >> He more closely resembles Gollum, contemptible >> creatures under the Enemy >> that in the end will play an important part in >> good's triumph over evil. Geoff: > Now there I would disagree with you. Both Grima and > Peter Pettigrew have surrendered themselves to an > insidious and evil being and have set out to plot > the downfall of people around them - Theoden/the > Potters. > > Gollum has become the pitiable creature that he is > because of the erosion of his will by the Ring; > the "two Worms" have each voluntarily allowed > themselves to be corrupted by their evil masters. > Silvana: Yes! Exactly my thinking, Geoff. :-X Silvana: >>> Fudge = Theoden SR: > I'm going to compare his role in the plot to that > of Lord Denethor. A figurehead, blinded by his own > power and desire to retain it. > GEO: >> Fudge is definitely not Theoden. Fudge consciously >> refused to believe in Voldemort's return >> Theoden was just an old man being misled by Wormtongue. >> Geoff: > That is too simple an analysis. Theoden was a > man of great dignity, power and loved by his people > . It was the sorcery of Saruman that > brought him so low. > Silvana: Fudge apologized to DD after the battle at the MoM and finally agreed on Voldemort's return. So I hope he will join and support DD against LV. SR: > I guess that would leave me comparing Arthur Weasley > to Theoden - leaders of large, 'country folk' families > ;) > Silvana: I don't think Arthur could be compared with Theoden. He wasn't mislead by anybody. But perhaps Percy?! Geoff: > I go back though to my first point; we cannot make > characters from each book fit the same template. > There is no "one size fits all". > Silvana: You are right. But it is fun, isn't it? ;-))) Alla: > What I want to know is whether Boromir (who is my > probably my favourite character in LOTR) will have > similarities with Snape or not. :o) > Silvana: How about Snape being the match for... Gollum! :-D JKR describes him as an ugly person. Once he was on LV's side (as an active DE) now he has changed sides and helps DD and Harry. He lives in the Dungeons as did Gollum. Ron (=Sam) hates him and doesn't trust him. Harry (= Frodo) has learned Snape's story from the Pensive (belongs to DD! = Gandalf) and he understood Snape's reactions / felt ashamed for his father. Greetings Silvana From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 31 17:40:40 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 17:40:40 -0000 Subject: Punishing Marietta In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120858 Janet: Remember, Marietta *chose* to become a traitor. She could have left Dumbledore's Army and not said anything. Choices. Very important. Her choices weren't in any way restricted or dictated by the hexed parchment, before or after she went to Umbridge -- it merely let the other people who would be affected by her choices know what she had chosen. Doesn't Dumbledore say that it's our choices that *show* what we are? Alla: I absolutely agree. Marietta brought it upon herself. We don't know though how "freely" she made that choice, don't we? Besides, I am not really concerned about Marietta as character, since she is mainly plot device, IMO, but I am definitely concerned about Hermione's character, because she is quite well developed by now and I do care about her. I want her to do the right thing or at least try to do the right thing as much as possible. Happy New year to you too, Alla. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 31 17:46:55 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 17:46:55 -0000 Subject: The Veil, HP & LOTR In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120859 > Silvana: > How about Snape being the match for... Gollum! :-D JKR > describes him as an ugly person. Once he was on LV's > side (as an active DE) now he has changed sides and > helps DD and Harry. He lives in the Dungeons as did > Gollum. Ron (=Sam) hates him and doesn't trust him. > Harry (= Frodo) has learned Snape's story from the > Pensive (belongs to DD! = Gandalf) and he understood > Snape's reactions / felt ashamed for his father. Alla: Hmmm, I can see similarities, but I hope not. Sorry! Golum does not do the right thing at the end (although it helps anyway) and I hope Snape will just as Boromir did (maybe he will even be lucky to survive). Besides, Boromir also fell to darkness for very short time, so here is similarity to Snape. Best, Alla From vmonte at yahoo.com Fri Dec 31 17:54:09 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 17:54:09 -0000 Subject: I like Hermione! Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120860 vmonte: I've noticed on a couple websites now, that people have very strong feelings about Hermione. To put it bluntly: they either hate her, or love her! Many of the arguments against Hermione have to do with the idea that she is too forceful a character, and a "know it all." Now, I happen to like Hermione. Sure she makes mistakes, like in the case of the house elves and the centaurs, but she is only a young girl. Surely, no one is perfect, especially at age 14. JKR doesn't print Hermione as perfect, and I like that. But, what she does do is write Hermione as a person who is capable of emotional growth. Hermione's character is like a real person; that is what makes her so interesting. Real people are not one dimensional, paper cutouts. They will often amaze you, going past what is often expected of them. And sometimes they will disappoint you, because they are human. Hermione is attracted to all that is good. In fact, she is often the voice of reason and morality. It's no mistake that Harry often thinks of what Hermione would say regarding the situations he finds himself in. Ron and Harry are very different from Hermione--they often break the rules. But IMO, Hermione needs their influence; they helped make her a little bit more flexible. I think she is a good person. She has grown intellectually, and emotionally. (It's the characters in the books that are incapable of emotional growth we should be closely watching, IMO.) I also think that Hermione is a great Heroine for young girls. She tells girls that being studious and smart are cool. When I was young, every book I read and movie I saw had the female lead falling in the forest during a chase scene. And the female lead would often need to be rescued by the male hero. Hermione, thank goodness, is not like that. And even though she is not the lead of the story, the HP books would suffer without her presence. Hermione also understands her place in the WW, and in Harry's life (her "books and cleverness" speech in SS/PS to Harry, for example). Hermione does what she does for Harry (and the WW) out of love and a sense of "high" moral values. (And I'm not saying here that Harry will be her love interest, I ship towards Ron.) I first started reading the HP books after I saw the Sorcerer's Stone movie. I went to see it with my husband and sister. There is a moment at the begining of the movie when Hermione says: "What an idiot!" and I started laughing. It was at this moment that my husband and sister turned to each other and said: "Oh God, it's Vivian!" I was not insulted by their remark I was flattered. Vivian From dontask2much at yahoo.com Fri Dec 31 17:56:11 2004 From: dontask2much at yahoo.com (charme) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 12:56:11 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Marietta and Hermione (was JKR's Messages ) (was Re: Hermione In Trouble?) References: Message-ID: <016e01c4ef62$04175d10$6601a8c0@MITRE.ORG> No: HPFGUIDX 120861 > Eggplant wrote: > "What about the time when he was 14 and magically arm wrestled with > Voldemort and won?" > > Del replies: > Is there any other witness to this than Harry? > > Do you really expect everyone to believe the word of a single teenage boy? charme now, Actually in GoF's arm wrestling between LV and Harry, there are witnesses: a bunch of Death Eaters. There's also the supporting confession of the plan from Barty Crouch, Jr made to DD and others after the TriWizard competition. While everyone might not believe the word of a single teenage boy, others did. Isn't that canon? > Del replies: >is "what I like is right and good and > what I don't like is evil and wrong", which prompts me to ask : are > you a god? charme again, This is just my 2 cents and may be off topic (List Elves, I'm SORRY!!!) as I have seen this question posed before in debates on this message board several times and I'd submit what a friend of mine tells me: everyone is a "god" in their own heads, so as he says, asking the question is pointless. :) From dontask2much at yahoo.com Fri Dec 31 18:04:20 2004 From: dontask2much at yahoo.com (charme) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 13:04:20 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Come out Petunia (long) References: <200412311226604.SM01044@devbox> Message-ID: <018e01c4ef63$275e51b0$6601a8c0@MITRE.ORG> No: HPFGUIDX 120862 > Vivamus: > While I like the idea, there is one small and one really gaping hole in > it. > The small hole is that I think metamorphmagi being really rare makes it > pretty far-fetched that Lilly's sister would be one -- unless, as you > suggest, BOTH Petunia and Harry are metamorphmagi. > > The gaping hole is the description of Petunia as being ugly. The idea > that > a woman who could choose her own appearance would permanently choose > ugliness is pretty hard to swallow. She very well may not want to be so > curvey that she has men falling all over her, but I doubt that any woman > born would choose to have an ugly face, if she had a choice about it. > charme: Thanks, Vivamus. Petunia may be ugly naturally and changed just her hair color, eyes, and maybe the shape of her nose (like Tonks did with her hair and nose in OoP.) Depends on how much Petunia could change, if she is one, huh? I'm not married to the theory and only give it about a 40% probability it could be the case and like I said, only JKR knows. :) I can't wait to find out what it is with Petunia... From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Fri Dec 31 18:04:38 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 18:04:38 -0000 Subject: Punishing Marietta In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120863 > Hickengruendler: > > I'm not sure. The whole scene was a bit unclear for me, but I think > Hermione didn't leave the parchment in the RoR. Umbridge said, that > she needed some evidence, and that the room provided the evidence. To > me, that sounds as if the parchment appeared in the room, because > Umbridge asked for it. After all, it was the Room of Requirement. > Neri: Hmm, an intriguing interpretation, for sure, but I can't find much canon to support it. During the first DA meeting in the RoR (Ch. 18) we are told about Hermione: *************************** She pinned the piece of parchment with all of their signatures on it on to the wall and wrote across the top in large letters: DUMBLEDORE'S ARMY *************************** Since then the parchment is not mentioned until the time when the DA is caught (Ch. 27), and then we are told about Umbridge: *************************** And to Harry's horror, she withdrew from her pocket the list of names that had been pinned upon the Room of Requirement's wall and handed it to Fudge. *************************** >From this I understand that the parchment had been pinned to the RoR's wall since the first meeting. Now that I read it again, it could also mean "the parchment that had been pinned upon the RoR's wall during the first meeting only", but this is a bolder interpretation, and you'd think that if this is what JKR meant she would have made it clearer. She could have easily told us after the end of the first meeting that Hermione took the parchment with her, but she didn't. Also, I think JKR is telling us here something about Hermione's flaws. It wouldn't be the first time that Hermione invests a lot of effort in some advanced magic and then messes it up by overlooking some trivial detail. She also did it with the Polyjuice potion, and was properly punished by JKR. In OotP she doesn't pay personally for her mistake, DD does. But this is in accordance with the theme of OotP: when you make bad mistakes, it is someone you care about who pays for them. Neri From jolka55 at poczta.onet.pl Fri Dec 31 18:08:55 2004 From: jolka55 at poczta.onet.pl (Julia) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 18:08:55 -0000 Subject: I like Hermione! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120864 > vmonte: > I first started reading the HP books after I saw the Sorcerer's Stone movie. I went to see it with my husband and sister. There is a moment at the begining of the movie when Hermione says: "What an idiot!" and I started laughing. It was at this moment that my husband and sister turned to each other and said: "Oh God, it's Vivian!" I was not insulted by their remark I was flattered. > Julia: just want to say that while watching the same scene my mother and sister told me the same thing... :D And i happen to like Hermione too, she is not my favourite character but she is important not only to the plot but also to harry and ron. Julia From vmonte at yahoo.com Fri Dec 31 18:11:59 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 18:11:59 -0000 Subject: The Veil, HP & LOTR In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120865 Silvana wrote: How about Snape being the match for... Gollum! :-D JKR describes him as an ugly person. Once he was on LV's side (as an active DE) now he has changed sides and helps DD and Harry. He lives in the Dungeons as did Gollum. Ron (=Sam) hates him and doesn't trust him. Harry (= Frodo) has learned Snape's story from the Pensive (belongs to DD! = Gandalf) and he understood Snape's reactions / felt ashamed for his father. vmonte responds: I also see Snape to be very much like Gollum. Two creatures twisted and controlled by their emotions. Gollum is a slave to the ring, and Snape is a slave to his past (old hurts, prejudices). Perhaps Snape, like Gollum, will unwittingly help Harry; not because he cares about Harry, but because he is after something Harry possesses...what that could be I'm not sure...yet. From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Fri Dec 31 18:40:11 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 18:40:11 -0000 Subject: Punishing Marietta In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120866 >Del wrote: > Now let's say that I'm completely enthusiastic about the group, but I > really really don't want to risk, say, my parents discovering about > it. Ernie might think that Hermione's word of keeping the list secret > is enough, but I don't agree with him. What should I do? If I don't > sign it, then I automatically become suspect by not wanting to admit I > was even there, even if in fact I'm enthusiastic about the group and > all I want is to avoid any risk of anyone ever discovering what I'm up to. Neri: Aren't you are asking too much? The group is obviously something that the Ministry won't like. You can't be enthusiastic about it, or even just be in it, and also avoid any risk. This is why choices like this are difficult. Because they involve risk. Hermione made it very plain that by signing they agree not to tell (the magic probably wouldn't have worked if she didn't). Not only Ernie, but also Smith had qualms about it, so it is obvious that signing wasn't mandatory. If Marietta were honest, she would have refused to sign it. Yes, it would have automatically made her become suspect, but rightly so. If you are not ready to commit yourself to secrecy, you make yourself suspect for breaking it. You are making a good case about Marietta being just a weak person who was caught between contradicting loyalties, but this is life, and this is war. Hermione had to take precautions, for the good of the whole group, that a single sneak would find it hard to betray them all, and she did just that. NOT doing it would have been failing to protect all the rest of the group. It would have been wrongdoing towards Ernie, Susan, Lavender, Neville, Ron and all the other members. Neri From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 31 20:10:09 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 20:10:09 -0000 Subject: "innate goodness" (Was: JKR's Messages) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120867 Carol earlier: > > I don't know about either of you, but I'm bothered by the word > > "innate," which suggests that their goodness is inborn--a concept very much at odds with the idea of choice. If they're innately good, they can make mistakes (and they do), but they can't become evil.< > > Pippin responded: > > I'm not sure I follow you. 'Innate' doesn't have to mean 'inviolate.' > Innate goodness can be damaged, and is, by the choices of others and by the characters' own choices. Once damaged, the characters may have to fight their own instincts in order to choose good. > > Further, the characters learn that the choice to resist evil, in themselves or in others, may cost them or their friends dearly. To make the right choice under those conditions takes courage, and that is not innate, it has to be cultivated. Tom Riddle, among other things, chose to cultivate greatness instead. Carol again: "Innate" means both "inborn" and "essential to." Here's Merriam-Webster's definition in case mine is unclear: "Main Entry: in?nate Pronunciation: i-'nAt, 'i-" Function: adjective Etymology: Middle English innat, from Latin innatus, past participle of innasci to be born in, from in- + nasci to be born -- more at NATION 1 : existing in, belonging to, or determined by factors present in an individual from birth : NATIVE, INBORN 2 : belonging to the essential nature of something : INHERENT 3 : originating in or derived from the mind or the constitution of the intellect rather than from experience - in?nate?ly adverb - in?nate?ness noun synonyms INNATE, INBORN, INBRED, CONGENITAL, HEREDITARY mean not acquired after birth. INNATE applies to qualities or characteristics that are part of one's inner essential nature ." So if Harry and company are "innately good," goodness is part of their *essence* and therefore unchangeable and incorruptible. Since Tom Riddle, in contrast to Harry, is clearly both corruptible and corrupted, he can't be "innately good." Either he's born morally neutral and is evil through his own choice, which I hope is the case, or he's innately evil--born bad, unable to make any choices except those that lead to his own corruption and the suffering and peril of those around him. And what about Draco? Clearly *he* isn't "innately good" or he'd have resisted the influence of his upbringing and joined Harry's side. Is he innately evil, then, or just the product of his environment (and a few unhealthy Slytherin genes)? Suppose that Draco had been raised as Harry was. Would he have risen from the bullying to become a hero like Harry or would he have become a bully like Dudley because he's "innately evil" as Harry is "innately good"? Granted, all people even in RL have innate tendencies, including abilities and personality traits (e.g., shyness or aggressiveness), but surely goodness is not one of these traits. If goodness is inborn, then its presence or absence is meaningless and characters are trapped in their own essential nature--born good or born bad and unable to choose otherwise. Harry must be able to choose to be evil and Draco to choose to be good in order for their respective goodness and evilness (if that's a word) to have any meaning. Their *natures* must be the product of their choices as well as their natural tendencies and upbringing or Dumbledore's words are just fluff and Harry and Draco are nothing more than puppets in a morality play. An innate characteristic, by its nature, cannot be changed. It is the *essence* of the person. And it seems to me that Harry's *courage* as well as his "goodness" is innate, a trait that he's born with (inherited from his Gryffindor parents). So he and the other "innately good" children are assigned to Gryffindor (or Hufflepuff or Ravenclaw) and those who are not "innately good" (either potentially or innately evil) are assigned to Slytherin. (An Essentialist rather than an Existentialist view of Good and Evil, as Nora would say. Correct me if I'm wrong, Nora!) I realize that certain events in the book are at odds with this concept and that Harry, especially in OoP, seems to be struggling with anger and the temptation to hurt others. (And that, to my mind, is as it should be, even if it does make him harder to like.) But notice that Dumbledore, as Nora has pointed out, says that our choices *show*--not *determine*--who we truly are. So it's possible that "who we truly are" has already been predetermined by our "innate" goodness or badness--unless, of course, a bit of someone else's evil nature entered into our souls at Godric's Hollow. I don't want this to be JKR's view--it's certainly not mine--but it's the view suggested by the phrase "innate goodness." I want you to be right that the choice to resist evil must be a struggle and that characters (e.g., Harry but also, more clearly, Snape) must sometimes fight their own instincts in order to choose good or evil, but that idea conflicts with the idea of an innately good or evil nature. If some characters are "innately good," others must be "innately evil"--an idea I find extremely disturbing. At any rate, it's the word "innate" that bothers me and I wish that JKR hadn't used it. And I wish that DD had used "determine" rather than "show." Carol From foxmoth at qnet.com Fri Dec 31 20:42:10 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 20:42:10 -0000 Subject: "innate goodness" (Was: JKR's Messages) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120868 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > Carol earlier: > > > I don't know about either of you, but I'm bothered by the word "innate," which suggests that their goodness is inborn--a concept very much at odds with the idea of choice. If they're innately good, they can make mistakes (and they do), but they can't become evil.< > > > > Pippin responded: > > > > I'm not sure I follow you. 'Innate' doesn't have to mean 'inviolate.' Innate goodness can be damaged, and is, by the choices of others and by the characters' own choices. Once damaged, the characters may have to fight their own instincts in order to choose good. > > Carol again: > "Innate" means both "inborn" and "essential to." > > Here's Merriam-Webster's definition in case mine is unclear: > > So if Harry and company are "innately good," goodness is part of their *essence* and therefore unchangeable and incorruptible.< Pippin: Um, that's too much of a leap for me. Regardless of what essence means in our world, how can any 'essence' be unchangeable and incorruptible in a world where a mild-mannered human can become a raging werewolf? Unless you are saying that the particular essence of goodness is to be unchangeable and incorruptible, but that's a philosophical argument I don't see put forward in the books. The unicorn is purely innocent, according to Firenze, but I don't see him describing humans that way. The way I see it, in the Potterverse human goodness is innate, but still fragile and corruptible as all human things are. Just because one is born with a characteristic doesn't mean it can't be changed by choice. I see a metaphor in which the human capacity for goodness is sheltered by love and damaged by anger and hate in very literal ways, so that Lily's sacrifice, *her* choice, has protected Harry from the anger and hate of those around him in a way that Draco and Riddle were not. But I also see that protection being worn away or circumvented so that Harry's choices become paramount. Pippin From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Fri Dec 31 20:45:25 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 20:45:25 -0000 Subject: (un)masking the DEs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120869 Carol: > Oh, and SSS, I don't think Lucius (graveyard scene) would have > brought up a *failed* attempt to restore LV, especially since he > got off pretty well compared with Avery. He was only reprimanded > rather than Crucio'd. Sometimes silence is golden. SSSusan: I know you don't. :-) And you'll note that I included in my post on this matter that I recognize there are posters who've said they believe he wouldn't have spoken up. I just don't see it that way, that's all. I think it would've been more "human nature" to have pointed out the attempt than to have stood silent, IF an honest effort to bring Voldy back had actually been made. Carol: > Next time JKR holds a chat, I hope someone asks her what Lucius > hoped to accomplish by giving Ginny the diary! SSSusan: And MY hope would be that someone would flat out ask, "Was Lucius actually trying to bring Voldemort back with the diary scheme, or was he up to something else?" I know you prefer NON-yes/no type questions, but I sometimes prefer them for the sense of finality they can provide. Siriusly Snapey Susan From Nrsedany2be at aol.com Fri Dec 31 20:46:15 2004 From: Nrsedany2be at aol.com (Nrsedany2be at aol.com) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 15:46:15 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: I like Hermione! Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120870 I think sometimes the reason most people don't want to like Hermione is because there is too much Hermione in them and they don't like it. Me personally Hermione is my favorite character for that reason. Hermione is me. I too have had the privilege of being a little miss know it all. And I love being like that, sometimes. I know what it's like to be alone because of that know it all attitude and nose in the book all the time. And like Hermione, a couple of good friends helped me to come out of that shell a bit. Still bit of a know it all and I always have my nose in a book. Danielle [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From siskiou at vcem.com Fri Dec 31 20:59:31 2004 From: siskiou at vcem.com (Susanne) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 12:59:31 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] I like Hermione! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <489073237.20041231125931@vcem.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120871 Hi, Friday, December 31, 2004, 9:54:09 AM, vmonte wrote: > I also think that Hermione is a great Heroine for young girls. She > tells girls that being studious and smart are cool. When I was young, > every book I read and movie I saw had the female lead falling in the > forest during a chase scene. And the female lead would often need to > be rescued by the male hero. Hermione, thank goodness, is not like > that. This made me smile, because in OotP this is exactly what Hermione did do (scramble and fall, whimper in fear). She isn't always like that, fortunately ;) -- Best regards, Susanne mailto:siskiou at vcem.com From greatelderone at yahoo.com Fri Dec 31 21:02:36 2004 From: greatelderone at yahoo.com (greatelderone) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 21:02:36 -0000 Subject: The Veil, HP & LOTR In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120872 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Silvana Roven" wrote: > Silvana: > I see your point. But I still tend to see Harry as > being Frodo. It is Harry who has to defeat the Dark > Lord. GEO: We don't know that. It seems from the recent evidence that it's going to be a team effort. As for Harry and Aragorn, both are considered the direct enemies of the two Dark Lords despite the fact that Aragorn could never defeat Sauron just as Harry presently has no hope of defeating Voldemort by himself. > Frodo inherited the One Ring from his uncle Bilbo who > was like a father to him. > Harry has only one thing, he has inherited from his > father: the INVISIBILITY cloak... GEO: And Aragorn inherited the Ring of Barahir, the shards of Narsil and the scepter of Arnor from his family legacy kept in trust by the elves. > AND I dislike your comparison of the Elves to the > Dursleys. In my opinion this family is like ORCS!!! > *lol* GEO: They aren't a direct analogue, but both kept Aragorn and Harry safe from their enemies while they were children. > Silvana: > Yes, he is the first man to fall... on the "side of > the light". The first one JKR killed was Quirrel. And > Quirrel has been tempted by Voldemort's power - as was > Boromir. GEO: Thats rather minor. Besides the thing between Boromir and Faramir is rather similar to Sirius and Remus, which is why I'm more inclined toward Sirius as Boromir and Quirrel died unrepentent unlike Boromir who died fighting the enemy like Sirius did. Silvana: > ;-) Both didn't want to enter upon the inheritance of > their ancestors... > GEO: That never happened in the book. Aragorn wanted the throne. > Silvana: > Radaghast the Brown? Help me with this one, please. > Who was it? GEO: He was one of the five wizards along with Gandalf and Saruman sent to ME by the Powers of the West and like Hagrid he had a fondness for the wilderness and its beasts which eventually caused him to stray though from his mission and like Hagrid Radagast was thought to be a simpleton by many. > > Silvana: > Fudge apologized to DD after the battle at the MoM and > finally agreed on Voldemort's return. So I hope he > will join and support DD against LV. GEO: I doubt it, he's more of an analogue of Chamberlain and the typical politician so I'm guessing he's still going to be a hinderance by overreacting to Voldemort. > Silvana: > How about Snape being the match for... Gollum! :-D JKR > describes him as an ugly person. Once he was on LV's > side (as an active DE) now he has changed sides and > helps DD and Harry. He lives in the Dungeons as did > Gollum. Ron (=Sam) hates him and doesn't trust him. > Harry (= Frodo) has learned Snape's story from the > Pensive (belongs to DD! = Gandalf) and he understood > Snape's reactions / felt ashamed for his father. GEO: Snape is definitely not Gollum. Snape has a will of his own unlike Gollum who is a pawn of the Ring or the Enemy. Again I think it's Peter Pettigrew, who is the closest. From greatelderone at yahoo.com Fri Dec 31 21:02:52 2004 From: greatelderone at yahoo.com (greatelderone) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 21:02:52 -0000 Subject: The Veil, HP & LOTR ?] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120873 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "inkling108" wrote: > In LOTR, Gollum was the wild card, a character whose ultimate > allegiance was uncertain and whose actions tipped the balance > (literally). In HP that role could be played by Wormtail and Snape > or both. GEO: I think's it going to be Wormtail. He's the one that no one expects anything from like Gollum. > --> Ron is preoccupied with money. He "hates being poor." JKR has > made such a point of this so often that I feel sure he will face a > major temptation to do with money, and how he handles it will be > crucial to the fate of the good guys. GEO: He may be tempted, but I think Ron has shown that he will always be loyal to Harry and his own family. > --> Snape goes more than a little bit mad when his emotions are > aroused. He did so in the Shreiking Shack in book 3, and again when > he discovered Harry in the pensieve. This is especially dangerous > for a spy who depends on occulmency to keep his cover. As he told > Harry "Fools...who cannot control their emotions...stand no chance > against his powers!" He may also change his allegiance in a moment > of emotion with catastrophic consequences for the side he betrays. > (As you can tell I'm not sure whose side he's really on!) GEO: I think he definitely has thrown his fate in with the Order. Right now he can't return to their ranks and even if he did he'd be tortured/punished by Voldemort if he admitted to it. > --> Lupin cares too much about approval and being liked. This is > what prevented him from telling Dumbledore about Sirius being an > animagus in book 3 and from reining in James and Sirius when he was > a prefect. If he once again keeps silent on some crucial > information because of this fear, the good guys are in trouble. GEO: I don't think he has any crucial information right now to sit on. > Neville, by contrast, may prove the most trustworthy of all because > he has faced his weakness -- fear of power -- and is mastering it. > It may be significant that Neville was the last man standing with > Harry during the battle at the Ministry at the end of OOtP. Neville > may turn out to be Harry's Sam. GEO: I disagree. Neville is another character that JKR used to contrast Harry with just like Voldemort. In short he was a potential prophecy child just as Harry was the one that was chosen though he still lost his parents and he carries his father's wand just as Harry carries his father's cloak. From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Fri Dec 31 21:02:37 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 21:02:37 -0000 Subject: Marietta and Hermione (was JKR's Messages ) (was Re: Hermione In Trouble?) In-Reply-To: <00d301c4ef52$fd99d350$6601a8c0@MITRE.ORG> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120874 charme wrote: "Cho insisted, so Marietta just blindly followed? If I take your post above and your quotes from the beginning of the meeting, this leads me to believe that Marietta had some sense what the group was about prior, had doubts about it prior, and *went anyway to follow Cho's lead.*" Del replies: Quite the way I see it, yes. But with the major detail that what she thought the group was going to be about was only practicing DADA. She wasn't aware of the political quality it would put on. Charme wrote: "If I play devil's advocate the way you are Del," Del replies: I'm not playing devil's advocate, I'm only trying to play Marrietta's advocate, to explain what her side of the story might have been. Even the worst criminals in RL have lawyers to defend them, so I think Marrietta can have one too. Charme wrote: " why would a teenager go against her inner voice which said "don't do this, bad idea?"" Del replies: Huh??? I'm not sure you meant what I understand. In my church, the worst opposition we have to face where teenagers are concerned is peer pressure. Even the most faithful and most obedient kids have a strong tendency to flush their standards and beliefs down the drain just for the sake of pleasing their friends. I've seen too many of them do things they would never have chosen to do, simply because their friends talked them into it. So I have absolutely no problem believing that Marrietta would go to those meetings simply because Cho implored her to. Charme wrote: " Marietta had a choice and she chose to go, and chose to reveal the group. If we go back to DD's statement in CoS it's all about the choices we make, isn't it? And the substance or basis of the septology JKR's created has to do with making the right choice, not the easy one, correct?" Del replies: Which do you think was easier : keep going to the meetings quietly (or maybe just not going anymore), or reporting the group to Umbridge? Marrietta didn't have to report the group to anyone, and yet she did it. This to me strongly indicates that reporting the group was what she thought was the right thing to do. Charme wrote: "If we go along those lines the logical right choice would have been for Marietta to say no to Cho and not go at all. " Del replies: According to what Cho says, it seems like Marrietta did say no to Cho, but Cho didn't take that for an answer. Del From greatelderone at yahoo.com Fri Dec 31 21:03:48 2004 From: greatelderone at yahoo.com (greatelderone) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 21:03:48 -0000 Subject: The Veil, HP & LOTR ?] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120875 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "inkling108" wrote: > In LOTR, Gollum was the wild card, a character whose ultimate > allegiance was uncertain and whose actions tipped the balance > (literally). In HP that role could be played by Wormtail and Snape > or both. GEO: I think's it going to be Wormtail. He's the one that no one expects anything from like Gollum. > --> Ron is preoccupied with money. He "hates being poor." JKR has > made such a point of this so often that I feel sure he will face a > major temptation to do with money, and how he handles it will be > crucial to the fate of the good guys. GEO: He may be tempted, but I think Ron has shown that he will always be loyal to Harry and his own family. > --> Snape goes more than a little bit mad when his emotions are > aroused. He did so in the Shreiking Shack in book 3, and again when > he discovered Harry in the pensieve. This is especially dangerous > for a spy who depends on occulmency to keep his cover. As he told > Harry "Fools...who cannot control their emotions...stand no chance > against his powers!" He may also change his allegiance in a moment > of emotion with catastrophic consequences for the side he betrays. > (As you can tell I'm not sure whose side he's really on!) GEO: I think he definitely has thrown his fate in with the Order. Right now he can't return to their ranks and even if he did he'd be tortured/punished by Voldemort if he admitted to it. > --> Lupin cares too much about approval and being liked. This is > what prevented him from telling Dumbledore about Sirius being an > animagus in book 3 and from reining in James and Sirius when he was > a prefect. If he once again keeps silent on some crucial > information because of this fear, the good guys are in trouble. GEO: I don't think he has any crucial information right now to sit on. > Neville, by contrast, may prove the most trustworthy of all because > he has faced his weakness -- fear of power -- and is mastering it. > It may be significant that Neville was the last man standing with > Harry during the battle at the Ministry at the end of OOtP. Neville > may turn out to be Harry's Sam. GEO: I disagree. Neville is another character that JKR used to contrast Harry with just like Voldemort. In short he was a potential prophecy child just as Harry was the one that was chosen though he still lost his parents and he carries his father's wand just as Harry carries his father's cloak. From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Fri Dec 31 21:03:50 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 21:03:50 -0000 Subject: Lupin's boggart (was: Remus and Sibyll sitting in a tree) In-Reply-To: <1e3.31e47151.2f060932@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120876 Chancie: > I have always wondered why his boggart is discribed as an orb, > personally I would think that more people than just Hermione would > notice it was a moon. It's not like they haven't all seen it > before. We know boggarts show detail from the descriptions > of when others encounter one. So wouldn't others see the moon > craters, or other equally defining characteristics? SSSusan: This may be a stupid thought, but isn't it possible that JKR was just trying to keep the information from the reader that it was the moon for a time? So that we wouldn't guess too early that Lupin was a werewolf? Also, presumably Lupin's boggart was fairly small -- at least as compared to something like Harry's dementor!boggart -- so if students weren't standing right beside Lupin, maybe they only saw the general shape & color? Siriusly Snapey Susan From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 31 21:05:00 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 21:05:00 -0000 Subject: Hex, Jinx, Curse, Charm & Spells In-Reply-To: <1ac.2eae84ea.2f065676@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120877 Chancie wrote: > > OK Question. Does anyone know what qualifies Spells as either, a Hex > Jinx, Curse, or Charm? I can't seem to find any kind of defining trait, except of course a Curse is bad. But it seems pretty much up in the air for the rest. I'd really like to know if anyone else has any ideas on this. Carol responds: Okay, I'll take a stab at it (though I don't "know" the answer). First, we have the distinction between a Charm, which changes the properties of a thing without changing its nature (causing it to float or fly, for example) or causes the thing to *do* something (e.g., appear or disappear). In contrast, Transfiguration changes one thing into something else, usually an inanimate object into an animal (e.g., pincushion into hedgehog) but sometimes a human being into an animal (with or without human sensibilities depending on the spell). If Sirius had really been able to transform himself into a potted plant as Hannah Abbott suggested, that would have been Transfiguration. Since hexes, jinxes, and curses don't change the nature of the person or object they're used on, I would argue (tentatively) that they are all Charms. Curses and hexes seem to be used on people and jinxes on objects, so (by this logic) Hermione jinxed the *parchment* to put a hex on the *person* who snitched on the DA. Hexes, it appears, are usually short-lived (poor Marietta's disfigurement seems to be an exception to the rule). Curses are crueller and either fatal (Avada Kedavra) or sustainable (semipermanent Imperius Curses like those the Crouches were under or the sustained Crucios that led to the Longbottoms' insanity). "Spell" is simply a general term that encompasses all Charms (including hexes, jinxes and" curses) and Transfiguration, erm, spells. IMO, a spell is a one- or two-word phrase, as contrasted with an incantation like the one Wormtail used to activate the potion ingredients that restored Voldemort's body in GoF. ("Double, double, toil and trouble. . . " is also an incantation, as is the second part of the Barrow Wight's song in LOTR.) A powerful wizard can sometimes perform a spell without speaking the spell out loud, accomplishing what he wants (cleaning up a spill, writing words on the board) with a wave of his wand. It appears that some spells, or at least curses (whatever spell Dolohov performed on Hermione in the DoM) are more powerful if spoken aloud. Whether deliberate wandless magic would also be considered a spell I don't know and won't attempt to say. Carol, noting that this post is only an attempt to answer your question and by no means a definitive answer From vmonte at yahoo.com Fri Dec 31 21:18:43 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 21:18:43 -0000 Subject: I like Hermione! In-Reply-To: <489073237.20041231125931@vcem.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120878 I (vmonte)wrote: I also think that Hermione is a great Heroine for young girls. She tells girls that being studious and smart are cool. When I was young, every book I read and movie I saw had the female lead falling in the forest during a chase scene. And the female lead would often need to be rescued by the male hero. Hermione, thank goodness, is not like that. Susanne responded: This made me smile, because in OotP this is exactly what Hermione did do (scramble and fall, whimper in fear). She isn't always like that, fortunately ;) vmonte again: Ugggh. Yes, I'm glad she isn't always like that too. But, Hermione has more than once saved Ron and Harry's skin. vmonte -- Who really needs to get some work done now. :) From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Fri Dec 31 21:21:38 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 21:21:38 -0000 Subject: Marietta and Hermione (was JKR's Messages ) (was Re: Hermione In Trouble?) In-Reply-To: <016e01c4ef62$04175d10$6601a8c0@MITRE.ORG> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120879 Charme wrote: "Actually in GoF's arm wrestling between LV and Harry, there are witnesses: a bunch of Death Eaters." Del replies: Yes, but did those witnesses report what they saw? No. They didn't testify. Harry has no supporting witness. Charme wrote: "There's also the supporting confession of the plan from Barty Crouch, Jr made to DD and others after the TriWizard competition. " Del replies: The confession of a supposedly-dead, now soulless wizard, made to DD and his two closest subordinates? By the way, do we even know whether DD revealed that confession to the public? Did he mention Barty Crouch Jr to anyone? Charme wrote: "While everyone might not believe the word of a single teenage boy, others did. Isn't that canon?" Del replies: Yes, some people believed Harry. But take a look at *who* they are : DD, who is known to have had a special fondness of Harry for years; the staff of Hogwarts who works under DD; some Aurors who trust DD; the Weasleys who have pretty much adopted Harry; Hermione who has been Harry's friend since their first year at Hogwarts; Sirius and Remus who were Harry's father's best friends; Luna whose father strongly mistrusts Fudge for his own reasons; Neville whose Gran was always a strong supporter of DD. And so on. Only people who liked either Harry or DD before LV's rebirth. They are hardly representative of the general public. Del From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Fri Dec 31 21:30:06 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 21:30:06 -0000 Subject: Marietta and Hermione (was JKR's Messages ) (was Re: Hermione In Trouble?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120880 In 120815 Del quoted: >>*at the beginning of the meeting: "Cho had just smiled at him and sat down on Ron's right. Her friend, who had curly reddish-blonde hair, did not smile, but gave Harry a thoroughly mistrustful look which plainly told him that, given her way, she would not be here at all". *But the worst is during the first DA lesson: "She laughed. Her friend Marrietta looked at them rather sourly and turned away. 'Don't mind her,' Cho muttered. 'She doesn't really want to be here but I made her come with me. Her parents have forbidden her to do anything that might upset Umbridge. You see - her mum works for the Ministry.'"<< Alla wrote: > "Marietta forces Cho to leave, not vice versa. Something tells me > that if marietta REALLY did not want to come. nothing of what Cho > said would have made her." Del replied: > Let me re-quote the first episode, at the beginning of the meeting: > "Cho had just smiled at him and sat down on Ron's right. Her > friend, who had curly reddish-blonde hair, did not smile, but gave > Harry a thoroughly mistrustful look which plainly told him that, > given her way, she would not be here at all". > > Notice the "given her way". Marrietta would not have been here if > Cho hadn't insisted, even Harry realises that. Moreover, as I > already said, when she accepted to come, Marrietta didn't know > what the DA would *really* be about. She might not have been > enthusiastic about a not-forbidden DADA practice group, but an > illegal anti-Umbridge group was another matter entirely! > Marrietta never wanted to belong to the DA, but she followed Cho > because she is her friend. SSSusan: I haven't agreed with everything Del has said in this thread, but for me she has hit the key points about Marietta & the DA. When I read the stuff Del has highlighted the first time through OotP I know I thought, "Uh-oh!" about Marietta. Surely many others did, too. IMO, first, Cho should never have badgered her friend into joining a group with such an IMPORTANT & SECRET FUNCTION. It's not like it was a Wizarding Chess Club or Hogwarts Howlers Cheer Block, after all. Second, Marietta should have told Cho in no uncertain terms that she really wasn't interested ? especially because of her mother's position. Maybe she did say that before the first Hog's Head meeting? If she did, Cho should have backed off. To join something like this simply because of a friend is stupid. What really surprises me in this whole situation *isn't* that Hermione placed the hex that would identify any snitch. What surprises me is that someone ? Hermione, especially ? didn't *notice* Marietta's reluctance at the HH and really WANT to check out her interest in the group. "Are you sure you want to be here? We only want people who are REALLY interested and TRULY committed to this group & its purpose." If I were Harry or Hermione, I think I would've been frightened of the signs she was showing. I mean, if she didn't want to be there, then why LET her join? Earlier in this thread I said that I was more bothered by the Hermione hex of Marietta for some reason than I was of her leading DJU to the forest. Part of it is that the DJU situation was a REALLY desperate one. But part of it is that I think I fault Hermione for not really ascertaining every single potential signer's level of interest in joining. It was too important a contract to take anyone who was wavering, and let's face it, SHE didn't personally invite all those who came. Siriusly Snapey Susan From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Fri Dec 31 21:41:01 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 21:41:01 -0000 Subject: Punishing Marietta In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120881 Neri wrote: " The group is obviously something that the Ministry won't like. You can't be enthusiastic about it, or even just be in it, and also avoid any risk. This is why choices like this are difficult. Because they involve risk. " Del replies: There's risk and risk. Getting caught when going to the meetings is one thing. Putting my name on a piece of paper is another. The first one is reasonable risk, the second one is a stupid and unnecessary risk. Neri wrote: "Hermione made it very plain that by signing they agree not to tell (the magic probably wouldn't have worked if she didn't). Not only Ernie, but also Smith had qualms about it, so it is obvious that signing wasn't mandatory." Del replies: They had qualms but Hermione didn't respect those qualms. I personally think that it is obvious that signing was mandatory. After all they were putting their names down so that they would know who was there at that first meeting. Anyone who was there had to sign. Neri wrote: "If Marietta were honest, she would have refused to sign it. Yes, it would have automatically made her become suspect, but rightly so. If you are not ready to commit yourself to secrecy, you make yourself suspect for breaking it." Del replies: I personally believe that Hermione wouldn't have let her not sign. the very fact that she even suggested they put their names down was an indication that she felt strongly about it. Neri wrote: "You are making a good case about Marietta being just a weak person who was caught between contradicting loyalties, but this is life, and this is war." Del replies: It was NOT a war. It's the last chapter of OoP that is titled to indicate the beginning of VWII. Neri wrote: "Hermione had to take precautions, for the good of the whole group, that a single sneak would find it hard to betray them all, and she did just that. NOT doing it would have been failing to protect all the rest of the group. It would have been wrongdoing towards Ernie, Susan, Lavender, Neville, Ron and all the other members." Del replies: Hermione DID fail to protect the DA, by not keeping a close eye on and not talking to a member who was very blatantly unhappy to be a part of the group. The trio had doubts about Zacharias Smith because he was vocal, but they blissfully ignored Marrietta because she was silent. Big mistake. They should have known better, after Peter Pettigrew. Del From dontask2much at yahoo.com Fri Dec 31 21:43:52 2004 From: dontask2much at yahoo.com (charme) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 16:43:52 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Marietta and Hermione (was JKR's Messages ) (was Re: Hermione In Trouble?) References: Message-ID: <01e101c4ef81$d24eb650$6601a8c0@MITRE.ORG> No: HPFGUIDX 120882 > Charme wrote: > "Actually in GoF's arm wrestling between LV and Harry, there are > witnesses: a bunch of Death Eaters." > > Del replies: > Yes, but did those witnesses report what they saw? No. They didn't > testify. Harry has no supporting witness. > > Charme wrote: > "There's also the supporting confession of the plan from Barty Crouch, > Jr made to DD and others after the TriWizard competition. " > > Del replies: > The confession of a supposedly-dead, now soulless wizard, made to DD > and his two closest subordinates? > By the way, do we even know whether DD revealed that confession to the > public? Did he mention Barty Crouch Jr to anyone? charme: I *think* and I could be wrong about my interpretation of this, but DD actually tells Fudge about Barty Jr in GoF, after Jr's soul has been sucked out by the Dementor. I don't know if we have canon which particularly states he told the public of the confession, no. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 31 21:50:27 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 21:50:27 -0000 Subject: Marietta and Hermione (was JKR's Messages ) (was Re: Hermione In Trouble?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120883 > SSSusan: snip. What really surprises me in this whole situation *isn't* that Hermione placed the hex that would identify any snitch. What surprises me is that someone ? Hermione, especially ? didn't *notice* Marietta's reluctance at the HH and really WANT to check out her interest in the group. "Are you sure you want to be here? We only want people who are REALLY interested and TRULY committed to this group & its purpose." If I were Harry or Hermione, I think I would've been frightened of the signs she was showing. I mean, if she didn't want to be there, then why LET her join? Alla: Oh, Susan if you put the question this way, then YES, I agree absolutely - Hermione should have been smarter and checking people with wierd reactions like Marietta's was. I do think that Hermione especially should have done it, because it was her idea, not Harry's and she had to convince him to. In short, I agree that WAS stupid on Hermione's post. Am, I understand you correctly that you don't fault Hermione for placing the jinx? I don't blame Hermione for placing the jinx, I just think that she should have thought about it better. I even keep going back and forth on whether she should have discussed it with the group. SSSusan: Earlier in this thread I said that I was more bothered by the Hermione hex of Marietta for some reason than I was of her leading DJU to the forest. Part of it is that the DJU situation was a REALLY desperate one. But part of it is that I think I fault Hermione for not really ascertaining every single potential signer's level of interest in joining. It was too important a contract to take anyone who was wavering, and let's face it, SHE didn't personally invite all those who came. Alla: As I said yesterday - I am convinced now - centaurs were "desperate time call for desperate measures" type of thing (in my opinion only) Hermione was saving Harry's life and sanity and I cannot fault her for that, even if the plan backfired. NO, under normal circumstances I would not want to see Hermione doing that at all, but those were NOT notmal circumstances and I disagree with Pippin that Hermione had time to change her plan while they were walking in the forest. She was already stressed out as it was (in my opinion) and was only thinking about the best outcome for THAT particular plan, not coing up with the new one. In short, I agree with you. I also find Marietta's situation to be more gray than centaurs' one. Alla. From dontask2much at yahoo.com Fri Dec 31 21:56:11 2004 From: dontask2much at yahoo.com (charme) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 16:56:11 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Marietta and Hermione (was JKR's Messages ) (was Re: Hermione In Trouble?) References: Message-ID: <020b01c4ef83$8b224650$6601a8c0@MITRE.ORG> No: HPFGUIDX 120884 > Del replies: >In my church, the worst opposition we have to face where teenagers are >concerned is peer pressure > So I have absolutely no problem believing that Marrietta would go to > those meetings simply because Cho implored her to. > > Charme wrote: > " Marietta had a choice and she chose to go, and chose to reveal the > group. If we go back to DD's statement in CoS it's all about the > choices we make, isn't it? And the substance or basis of the > septology JKR's created has to do with making the right choice, not > the easy one, correct?" > > Del replies: > Which do you think was easier : keep going to the meetings quietly (or > maybe just not going anymore), or reporting the group to Umbridge? > Marrietta didn't have to report the group to anyone, and yet she did > it. This to me strongly indicates that reporting the group was what > she thought was the right thing to do. > Charme wrote: > "If we go along those lines the logical right choice would have been > for Marietta to say no to Cho and not go at all. " > > Del replies: > According to what Cho says, it seems like Marrietta did say no to Cho, > but Cho didn't take that for an answer. > charme again - Actually if I take your statement regarding your experience in your church, peer pressure and teenagers, I think perhaps saying no and not bowing to the peer pressure to attend may be more difficult choice for Ms. Marietta. :) Logically, (and this is an extreme to make my point) unless someone held her hostage and threatened her physically, there would have been no reason to go. And I don't think Cho, being her friend, did that. :) From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 31 22:06:08 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 22:06:08 -0000 Subject: Marietta and Hermione (was JKR's Messages ) (was Re: Hermione In Trouble?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120885 Del (responding to Eggplant): > Nobody saw LV, except for Harry. A *single* teenage boy. Nobody [except Harry] has seen LV reborn, and nobody has claimed to be working for him. > Hence, I maintain that the WW wasn't at war in OoP, because: > 1. There is no visible enemy > 2. There are no visible war casualties > > That doesn't contradict the fact that there was a war going on in the WW during OoP. But that war was very secret, it was in no way an open thing. So I find it a bit unfair to expect the public to not only know about it but even take a side in it. > As you said in your other post: it's all about how much information > people have access to, and then exercising their best judgement. Carol adds: One more point in support of Del. Harry refuses to explain, either to Cho alone or to the DA, how Cedric died. Granted, he might not have been believed if he had done so, but he doesn't even make the attempt. There's only the half-truth, stated by Harry and echoed by Dumbledore, that Voldemort murdered Cedric. Bodiless Vapormort, whom the DA members may or may not know was formerly inside Quirrell's head, murdered a TWT champion? The DA members don't know that Wormtail resurrected Voldemort, much less that Babymort ordered Wormtail to "kill the spare." It's surprising that *any* of the DA members other than the Gryffindors believe Harry. He's told them virtually nothing. And it's no surprise at all that Marietta, whose mother works for the MoM, thinks he's inventing the story of Voldemort's return, perhaps to cover his own guilt in Cedric's death. He's provided no evidence whatever to support his claim. As Del indicates, the only available "information" was what the MoM provided via the Daily Prophet. Harry does not even provide his own explanation of events. And DD doesn't explain them, either. He merely asks for a salute to the murdered Cedric and another to Harry, who has miraculously escaped Voldemort. *How?* *What happened?* The students aren't told. And, to repeat, Harry adamantly refuses to clarify matters for the DADA members: "Zacharias said dismissively, 'All Dumbledore told us last year was that Cedric Diggory got killed by You-Know-Who and that you brought Diggory's body back to Hogwarts. He didn't give us details, he didn't tell us exactly how Diggory got murdered, I think we'd all like to know--' "'If you've come to hear exactly what it looks like when Voldemort murders someone I can't help you,' Harry said. His temper. . . was rising again. . . . "I don't want to talk about Cedric Diggory, all right? So if that's what you're here for, you might as well clear out" (OoP Am. ed. 341). Harry has hardly strengthened his position with that reaction. Hermione rescues the situation by reminding the group that they're meeting to "learn some defense." Had she not spoken up, it's likely that Zacharias, Marietta, and others would have walked out at that moment. If Harry had told the full truth, they would have realized that he could not be making it up. Instead, he aroused their suspicions by being suspicious himself. Carol, hoping for a civil response that does not label her views as "ridiculous" or "nonsense" From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Fri Dec 31 22:12:23 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 22:12:23 -0000 Subject: JKR's Messages (was Re: Hermione In Trouble?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120886 Nora wrote: > > My personal parsing is that, in JKR's world, I suspect that some > > people are more inclined to do what is good, and some inclined > > to do what is evil. Those essences are affected by upbringing, > > but their manifestation into the world is a case of choice on > > the part of the person. Draco, for instance, is naturally > > inclined to be selfish and jealous, and his choices as > > manifested in his actions show us this. Harry is naturally > > inclined to be a good person, and at times has to struggle to > > make the choices that correspond. Compared to Draco, perhaps > > it's that Draco is unwilling to invest the effort? Neri: > Well, if we DO choose to argue about free will in a story, we > should differentiate very clearly between the plot level and the > author's intentions level. In the author's intensions level (I > leave it to Carol and Nora to supply the exact terms) no character > in the story has free will. They all do what the author makes them > do, so if she decides that Harry is good and Malfoy is bad, then > these are the "choices" she will make them take. But within the > story, there's no need to assume that someone is innately good or > innately evil. As long as they are persons, they have free will. > Some of them chose to do good and some of them chose to do evil. > Assuming they were innately bent on good or evil discredit their > free will and thus their personhood. > > So I'm sure that the trio will generally make the good choices > because in the level of the author's intensions they are obviously > the good heroes of the story. But I still maintain that within the > story, to assume that they are innately good is to discredit their > personhood. > > I know this sounds like a paradox, but it's not my fault. It is the > built-in paradox of fiction. A "character" from outside the story > is a "person" within the story. SSSusan: I do think I get the distinction you're making, Neri, but I'm not sure it's going to show in what I say here. :-| What do you make of the fact that it was JKR who was identifying the trio as persons she tends to see as "innately good"? Do you think she's simply saying, that because of the choices she's going to *make* them make as their creator, she CAN see them that way? Or is she saying that within the book, as characters, she sees them that way? Because I didn't see this comment as authorial intention when I read it. It seems to me that, having this phrase come from the horse's mouth as it were, that if it's discrediting their personhood, then JKR herself did that. I mean, is it problematic to you that *she's* the one who said it, or do you see it differently? Siriusly Snapey Susan From dontask2much at yahoo.com Fri Dec 31 22:20:20 2004 From: dontask2much at yahoo.com (charme) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 17:20:20 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Marietta and Hermione (was JKR's Messages ) (was Re: Hermione In Trouble?) References: Message-ID: <022f01c4ef86$ea83d160$6601a8c0@MITRE.ORG> No: HPFGUIDX 120887 >> That doesn't contradict the fact that there was a war going on in > the WW during OoP. But that war was very secret, it was in no way an > open thing. So I find it a bit unfair to expect the public to not only > know about it but even take a side in it. > >> As you said in your other post: it's all about how much information >> people have access to, and then exercising their best judgement. > > > Carol adds: > One more point in support of Del. Harry refuses to explain, either to > Cho alone or to the DA, how Cedric died. Granted, he might not have > been believed if he had done so, but he doesn't even make the attempt. > There's only the half-truth, stated by Harry and echoed by Dumbledore, > that Voldemort murdered Cedric. Bodiless Vapormort, whom the DA > members may or may not know was formerly inside Quirrell's head, > murdered a TWT champion? The DA members don't know that Wormtail > resurrected Voldemort, much less that Babymort ordered Wormtail to > "kill the spare." It's surprising that *any* of the DA members other > than the Gryffindors believe Harry. He's told them virtually nothing. > > And it's no surprise at all that Marietta, whose mother works for the > MoM, thinks he's inventing the story of Voldemort's return, perhaps to > cover his own guilt in Cedric's death. He's provided no evidence > whatever to support his claim. As Del indicates, the only available > "information" was what the MoM provided via the Daily Prophet. Harry > does not even provide his own explanation of events. And DD doesn't > explain them, either. He merely asks for a salute to the murdered > Cedric and another to Harry, who has miraculously escaped Voldemort. > *How?* *What happened?* The students aren't told. And, to repeat, > Harry adamantly refuses to clarify matters for the DADA members: > > "Zacharias said dismissively, 'All Dumbledore told us last year was > that Cedric Diggory got killed by You-Know-Who and that you brought > Diggory's body back to Hogwarts. He didn't give us details, he didn't > tell us exactly how Diggory got murdered, I think we'd all like to know--' > > "'If you've come to hear exactly what it looks like when Voldemort > murders someone I can't help you,' Harry said. His temper. . . was > rising again. . . . "I don't want to talk about Cedric Diggory, all > right? So if that's what you're here for, you might as well clear out" > (OoP Am. ed. 341). > > Harry has hardly strengthened his position with that reaction. > Hermione rescues the situation by reminding the group that they're > meeting to "learn some defense." Had she not spoken up, it's likely > that Zacharias, Marietta, and others would have walked out at that > moment. If Harry had told the full truth, they would have realized > that he could not be making it up. Instead, he aroused their > suspicions by being suspicious himself. > charme - I understand what you're saying. However, Harry has horrors his schoolmates can't imagine, as Lupin eloquently tells Harry in PoA in response to Harry's concern he's weak because the Dementors affect him so. Harry appears not to be mature enough to understand the importance of sharing such details; if he did, we might not have the story we do. :) Would the details of Cedric's death truly make an impact on those who have not experienced anything before or after LV's demise? From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 31 22:30:12 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 22:30:12 -0000 Subject: Marietta and Hermione (was JKR's Messages ) (was Re: Hermione In Trouble?) In-Reply-To: <022f01c4ef86$ea83d160$6601a8c0@MITRE.ORG> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120888 Charme - I understand what you're saying. However, Harry has horrors his schoolmates can't imagine, as Lupin eloquently tells Harry in PoA in response to Harry's concern he's weak because the Dementors affect him so. Harry appears not to be mature enough to understand the importance of sharing such details; if he did, we might not have the story we do. :) Would the details of Cedric's death truly make an impact on those who have not experienced anything before or after LV's demise? Alla: Agreed. I don't think ANY details would have made those who did not believe Harry change his mind, only willingness to look in the face of the truth, OR the word of those whom general public respects. And THAT'S what probably bugs me the most - I still think that general public OWED Harry to hear him out fully and THEN make up their mind whether to believe him or not. Instead they chose to listen to corrupted journalists, controlled by Fudge. Oh, well, the truth alwasy comes to light eventually. Just my opinion, Alla From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Fri Dec 31 23:19:01 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 23:19:01 -0000 Subject: Marietta and Hermione (was JKR's Messages ) (was Re: Hermione In Trouble?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120889 Alla wrote: "And THAT'S what probably bugs me the most - I still think that general public OWED Harry to hear him out fully and THEN make up their mind whether to believe him or not. Instead they chose to listen to corrupted journalists, controlled by Fudge." Del replies: The public DID listen - once Harry talked. The Quibbler's edition containing Harry's interview sold fastest ever, and they even had to print another batch IIRC. People WERE willing to hear Harry out fully - it's Harry who wasn't willing to talk. Seamus asked, Zacharias asked, but Harry refused to talk. He demanded that they believe the fantastic and thoroughly simplified version DD fed them. There was NOTHING for people to hear out FULLY. People were FORCED to take a decision based on a few unsupported and undetailed lines of story. Forced by Harry. I can't blame them for going against Harry. Honestly, if a teenager said tomorrow that he didn't kill another kid, it's the aliens who did it, and no he's not going to tell more, well, I wouldn't believe him either. As for listening to corrupted journalists, I don't think most people made the choice to listen to *corrupted* journalists. They didn't know the journalists were corrupted. Del From Jen at alveymedia.com Fri Dec 31 23:45:17 2004 From: Jen at alveymedia.com (Jennifer Nielsen) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 16:45:17 -0700 Subject: HP & LOTR In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120906 In my view, there are clear comparisons between Sauron/Voldemort, Dumbledore/Gandalf, Harry/Frodo, and Sam/Ron. But just because JKR said she was inspired by LOTR doesn?t mean she lifted every character directly. You might make the same comparisons with HP and Star Wars: Voldemort/Darth Vader, Dumbledore/Obi Wan Kanobi, Harry/Luke, Ron/Han Solo, and Hermione/Leia. This is all made easy because these are classic characters: ultimate bad guy, older mentor, reluctant hero, loyal best friend, et cetera. There are several definite similarities between the HP and LOTR books, I agree. I just don?t think there's an exact match for each and every character. Jen From silvanaroven at yahoo.de Fri Dec 31 22:11:58 2004 From: silvanaroven at yahoo.de (silvanaroven) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 22:11:58 -0000 Subject: The Veil, HP & LOTR In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 120908 > GEO: Snape is definitely not Gollum. Snape has a will of his own > unlike Gollum who is a pawn of the Ring or the Enemy. Again I think > it's Peter Pettigrew, who is the closest. > Silvana: ... or Kreacher!!! L&h Silvana From pjarrett at gmail.com Fri Dec 31 21:09:57 2004 From: pjarrett at gmail.com (Patrick Jarrett) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 16:09:57 -0500 Subject: Lupin's boggart (was: Remus and Sibyll sitting in a tree) In-Reply-To: References: <1e3.31e47151.2f060932@aol.com> Message-ID: <3def328f041231130962824f0a@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 120910 > SSSusan: > This may be a stupid thought, but isn't it possible that JKR was > just trying to keep the information from the reader that it was the > moon for a time? So that we wouldn't guess too early that Lupin was > a werewolf? > > Also, presumably Lupin's boggart was fairly small -- at least as > compared to something like Harry's dementor!boggart -- so if > students weren't standing right beside Lupin, maybe they only saw > the general shape & color? Patrick: Precisely my thoughts. There was a teacher who once told me to never tell the reader everything until it was absolutely necessary and that is what I think JKR was doing. The movie showed it as a moon with clouds and sky but I had always thought of it more as SSSusan described it. -- Patrick